Hrehovcsik M 2005 - Current Game Design Methodologies - Finding A New Approach

Current Game Design Methodologies:
Finding a New Approach
By
Micah M Hrehovcsik
GDD-3
04-06-2005
Contents
1 FORWARD 1
2 INTRODUCTION 3
2.1 THESIS INTRODUCTION 3

2.2 GAME DESIGNER AND GAME DESIGN 3
2.3 METHODOLOGY IN GAME DESIGN 4
2.4 USING GAME DESIGN METHODOLOGY 5
3 GAME DESIGN 6
3.1 INTRODUCTION 6
3.2 GAME PLAY 6
3.3 THE PLAYER 7
3.4 GAME RULES 8
3.5 GAME DESIGN THEORY 9
3.6 THE GAME DESIGNER 10
3.7 GAME DESIGN CONCLUSION 11
GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEWS (INTRODUCTION) 12
GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEW (GUERRILLA) 13
4 GAME DESIGN METHODS 14
4.1 INTRODUCTION 14
4.2 EARLY GAME DESIGN METHODS 14
4.2.1 COWBOY GAME DESIGN 14
4.2.2 STORYBOARDING 16
4.3 GAME DESIGN PROCESS METHODS 17
4.3.1 DESIGN BIBLE METHOD 17
4.3.2 ITERATIVE DESIGN 19
4.3.3 CABAL GAME DESIGN PROCESS 21
4.4 GAME DESIGN GUIDELINE METHODS 23
4.4.1 DISCOURSE BY ANECDOTE 23
4.4.2 400 RULES 24
4.4.3 FADT (FORMAL ABSTRACT DESIGN TOOLS) 26
4.4.4 PATTERN METHOD 28
4.4.5 LEXICON APPROACH 30
4.4.6 GAME DESIGN TAXONOMY 31
Contents
GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEW (WOEDEND) 34
5 QUESTIONS CONCERNING GAME DESIGN METHODS 36
5.1 INTRODUCTION 36
5.2 ARE WE MAKING GAMES BETTER WITH METHODOLOGY? 37
5.3 WHERE ARE METHODOLOGIES COMING FROM? 38
5.4 WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF GAME DESIGN METHOD? 39
5.5 HOW TO IDENTIFY A GAME DESIGN METHOD? 40
5.6 WHERE DOES THE GAME DESIGNER FIT INTO GAME DESIGN METHOD? 41
GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEW (PLAYLOGIC) 42
6 CONCLUSION 43
COLOPHONE 45
BIBLIOGRAPHY 46
1 Forward
In 2002 , as circumstances would have it I came back to the Netherlands after

working as general manager in my father’s hotel in Playa del Carmen, Mexico. When
I arrived in the Netherlands I immediately realized I needed to reeducate myself,
because of this that I happened across the Game Design and Development
education offered by the HKU’s KMT. I realized immediately that I could turn my
hobby of designing games into something more concrete. I am currently in my third
year at the HKU and after a very broad education in game design and development;
my interests have narrowed down to that of a game designer. Thanks to the
internship that was required during my education at the HKU, I was hired as the
Game Architect at Overloaded Pocket Media a subsidy of Endomal. This has been a
great opportunity to gain experience and insight into the game industry. Further more
it has given me direct experience implementing formal methods for game design and
game design process.
This research paper is a paper about the current methodologies that are used in the
industry. While my sources about methodology are mostly none European, the
interviews in this document is specifically aimed at our industry here in the
Netherlands. The purpose is to give the reader insight into how game designers in
our industry view game design methodologies. At the end of this paper I would like to
even be so bold as to present my own ideas of how we can best approach the some
what unwieldy subject of Methodology in Game Design. For Game Designers whom
wish to get an overview of what Game Design Methodologies that exist. I hope this
will act as a guide for them to understanding the current methodologies.
Unfortunately this paper can not go into depth about each methodology as that would
require research papers unto themselves, but I do hope that this will make my reader
aware of the different methodologies that can be used as tools while designing a
game.
1
2
2 Introduction
2.1 Thesis Introduction
In this paper the methodologies are divided into three groups in order to give the
reader a clear difference in methodologies. The methodologies have also ordered to
show how some methods predate others. In the first group of methodologies are the
methods that are considered outdated, but are included to give the reader an idea as
to why and where methods have sprung from. It is important that the reader
understand that methods can become outdated and that new methods should be
explored. Another part of game design methods is the game design process. These
methods determine how game design will be compiled and then shared during the
game development process. Having a method for sharing the design is an important
part of implementing your design during development. Process also includes how the
designer goes about determining if the game is playable or not. The age old question,
“is it fun?” asked over and over. The next category of methods, are methods that are
more guidelines and are concerned more with game play than process. These are
helpful methods for the game designer to create rules, patterns and other tools used
for game design. In the end it is what could be called Game Design Theory, as all
these lend themselves as theoretical methods to help the game designer design
games and build them up in a logical manner.
2.2 Game Designer and Game Design
The Game Designer is a recent development that is still in the process of being
accepted by the Game Industry. Especially here in Europe the role of the Game
Designer is only now becoming understood. In the early days of the industry the role
of Game Designer was typically reserved for those with the most experience in the
industry. In the board game industry the game designer is considered the game
inventor. The game inventor is well established in the board industry and it has been
accepted that the game inventor is responsible for the game’s design. The game
designer-inventor is for the first time since the invention of games now educated to
be such. Whatever game industry you intend to be involved in, a thorough knowledge
of methodologies can give you an edge to your design. Of course, methodologies are
no guarantee to a successful game but they can help us avoid the pitfalls of our
predecessors.
So no guarantee, uh? Not even a warrantee. So what are methodologies good for?
In this paper you will read a lot about how to use these methods, but all the methods
in this paper share similar qualities in what they have to offer. For starters they have
the ability to clarify the concepts of game design for a larger group of people than just
a single game designer. This is especially helpful when working in development
teams. Methodologies act as purveyors of formalized communication for
professionals, students and hobbyists. This has been something that up until now
has been a difficult and slow process for a some what introverted community.
Methodologies also become a way to bring the game design and development
community closer together as a real community. Lastly, by having methodologies we
are providing future generations of game designers a wealth of knowledge and
experience.
3
2.3 Methodology in Game design
Not everyone agrees with each other about using methodologies in game design. It is
not just about which methods to use but if methodologies should even be used. It is
thus important to investigate the reasons for having or not having methodologies in
game design. Fields such as film long ago created methodologies in which they use
to create a common denominator in which to communicate the process, effectiveness
of the medium and concepts for the medium (Bernd Kreimeier, 2003). There is
actually very little on the topic as to why it is a natural progression towards
methodologies in the first place. Could it be the need of better organization of
information? Much of the discussion on methodologies seem to take place behind
closed doors of game developer conferences where there is very little written record
of what was actually discussed.
Researching this subject has brought about these conclusions why methodologies
are useful in the first place for game design. One of the first reasons for
methodologies to be used in game design is that we are creating a language that can
help us communicate our ideas and experiences better. Communication is a key to
any successful field of study, design or art. Imagine a world where I could call a cat a
dog just because I thought that it fit. As you can imagine this would create a
considerable amount of confusion. Like all fields and studies, there is a need for a
formal language so that communication about the subject is accomplished in an
efficient and professional manor. This in turn lays the ground work for future
generations. Having can only help the field of game design to grow and be taken
seriously as a true academic study.
These methodologies will give future game designers the tools to circumvent the
mistakes of their predecessors. It may also allow then to use these tools in new and
creative ways. If stuck with having to recreate these tools individually, then we will
see stagnation in our game designs as we watch people make the same mistakes
over an over again. Methodologies also have possible downsides. They in
themselves, when not created correctly or used correctly can also be the cause of
stagnation. When a design relies on methodologies too heavily, it takes away from
creativity, but up to this point there is no one that suggests that a designer should rely
upon methodology as golden path to creating a great game. Game design
methodologies remain tools and should not be confused with the creative materials
you use to build the game’s design (Bernd Kreimeier, 2002). The last complaints
concerning game design methodologies is that they may have been created by
people that are by people that are more researchers and less game designers. This
opinion may actually be a result of not being able to teach old dogs new tricks. All
game designers use a method, even if it is there own unique one. Professionals that
have had a lot of experience have created their own unique methods. Nothing can
replace experience, but for game design to be taken serious as an academic field of
study these methodologies need to be available and formalized for the aspiring game
designer.
4
2.4 Using Game Design Methodology
Something that should be stressed and is stressed through out this paper is that
these methods should not be relied upon as the ultimate answer to creating the
perfect game. These methods are only guidelines that game designers should use as
tools. The danger of all methodology is abiding by them too rigidly. This is of course
the last thing game designers would want as this would affect creativity and
ingenuity. Just because there is a danger of becoming this way doesn’t mean that we
should be afraid to create methods, after all, the benefits out way the disadvantages.
5
3 Game Design
3.1 Introduction
To understand game design methodologies we first need to understand what game

design is? In this chapter, we will touch upon the primary aspects of game design. It
is important that the reader have a general understanding of what game design is
before continuing on to discuss game design methods for guidelines and game
design methods for process, so this chapter will be dedicated to a quick explanation
of the most important elements in a game design.
Game design is the process of determining the contents of the game (Salen and
Zimmerman, 2004). The contents that are determined by a game design can be a
design process, game play, game rules, player interaction, and even narrative. The
contents of a game design can vary widely. These are usually based upon the
preferences and needs of the designer and developers. The first part of this chapter
will explore perhaps the most important aspect of a game, which is game play. After
all what is a game with out game play? The chapter will then go on to discuss the
importance of the player to the designer. What are games for, if not for the players?
The next part of this chapter I will discuss the rules in a game. If there is anything that
all games are created equal in, then it is that they have rules that form a system.
Even if the rules of the game are that there are no rules, then there still is a rule for
the game. We will also discuss in this chapter game design guidelines, which is not to
be confused with the mathematical game theory. Game design theory is perhaps a
very ambiguous term that is used here, but it is perhaps the best way to describe the
study of game design methodologies, game history, game sociology and game
psychology (Rouse, 2001). A good foundation in game design theory can make a big
difference when designing a game. The last part of this chapter I will discuss the role
of the game designer from the game design point of view.
3.2 Game Play
Game play includes all player experiences during the interaction with a game’s
systems. Proper use is coupled with reference to "what the player does". Arising
alongside the development of game designers in the 1980s, game play was used
solely within the context of video or computer games, though now its popularity has
begun to see use in the description of other, more traditional, game forms (Wikipedia,
2005). If there is one thing all game designers can agree upon is that game play is
essential to a game, but not all game designers agree upon where the game play
comes from. There are many thoughts on the subject. The key aspect of game play
seems to be interaction.
“A game's game play is the degree and nature of the interactivity that the game
includes, i.e., how the player is able to interact with the game-and how that game-
reacts to choices the player makes.”
- (Rouse, 2001)
6
In varying degrees we have the game play dependent upon aspects of a game’s
design such as its rules.
“Game play is the formalized interaction that occurs when players follow the rules of
a game and experience its system through play.”
- (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004)
Game play can also be about looking at a game as achieving a determined result,
usually winning. This is usually an outlook derived by mathematical game theory
which is a more scientific.
“The strategies required to reach specific endpoints are collectively termed game
play.”
- (Rollings and Morris, 2004)
Essentially there can be no game without game play. Play is what the player must
feel when participating in a game. The only rule to this is, participation must be of the
player’s own free will and interaction is usually contained with the game’s reality
(Callois, 2001).
What is important to understand is that game play can be designed by knowing how
interaction can be implemented. Thus, the designer is responsible for the design of
the game play in a game’s design. Consider this game play from a game designer’s
point of view. Game Play is essentially the core aspect of the game and becomes the
action or actions that you will give the player in which to participate in the game.
Games can be designed from many perspectives but perhaps game design aimed at
achieving a certain type of game play. Would this be an optimal starting point?
Maybe this seems an obvious way to design game play but you often see that game
play is the last thing that people consider after visuals, narratives, features and
themes. This leads us to the next point of identifying your core game play which is an
essential part of understanding game play (Fullerton, Swain and Hoffman, 2004).
Game Play can be defined at many levels of a game’s design. For example game
play can be at high level design split into narrative, simulation or ludology. Game Play
can even be split to its smallest form defined as elements, such as shooting, timing,
jumping, and managing. This process of identifying core game play can be an
essential tool to understanding what it is you want to achieve with your design.
3.3 The Player

The game is a game in first place because of players, so when we discuss game
design how can we not talk about the player. So what is a player?
“Players may compete individually, or in aggregates known as teams which normally

win or lose as a whole. Players may be human, or may be the result of artificial
intelligence.”
- (Wikipedia, 2005)
Players are driven in games by rewards and challenges. Rewards are the result of
the player succeeding in the game, while challenges offer the reason for game to be
7
played. These concepts are closely related to the player and must be taken into
consideration when designing. When designing a game, the player and the design
must go hand in hand. Once we understand that a game is for players, we must also
understand that games should be designed for players. Game design references
continuously advise us to design from the point of view of the player. The game
designer must become the player’s advocate. This attitude of keeping the player in
mind has been behind the recent development of the iteration method. The iteration
idea is simple, let the player design the game (Fullerton, Swain and Hoffman, 2004).
It has been a trend of technology to forget the user. This has occurred mostly in
usability but game design has also suffered. Technology has been responsible for
such fields as ergonomics and interaction design to become new fields of study in
finding ways to make technology friendlier. Unfortunately this hasn’t caught on
entirely with game designers. This is not about interfaces; this is about considering
the player first.
“This seems logical, but all too often the player comes last……..”
- (Fullerton, Swain and Hoffman, 2004)
Focus on player design is not about giving the mass market what they are told to
want, but more about making your game assessable to the player. It is the
consideration of how much effort the player must give to the game in order to play the
game. As a rule of thumb people are lazy and if we realize this then we know that a
casual player requires games that take minimal effort to play. On the other hand we
have to appease the hardcore player’s love for tough challenges. It is then the
challenge of the designer to find the middle ground so that both can play the game.
Keeping the player in mind is not just about making the game playable. It is also
about expressing the game design to a development team (or to yourself) in a player
oriented way. Subjects that are directly related to the player should be associated in
one section. Thus, everything directly related to the player is described in detail,
including information he or she have available while playing the game. Subjects that
could be considered to be directly concerned the player directly are rewards, the
HUD (heads-up-display), UI/GUI (User-interface/Graphical-user-interface) and
camera issues.1 This is by no means a standard way of associating this information,
but if we look at its logic we notice it is based upon understanding that the player is
reliant upon the information the game provides. The type of information a game’s
system provides is fundamental to the player’s ability to function and make decisions
while playing the game.
3.4 Game Rules

Rules make up the structure of all games. Without the system that rules create the
game would cease to be a game but then revert back to pure play. All game designs
share the fact that they are built upon rules. These rules then form the structure of
the game and become the system in which the player’s experience game play (Salen
and Zimmerman, 2004). When creating rules for a game, be it a video or board
game, it is game design theory that will provide the designer guidelines on how to
prevent unnecessary rules or rules that ruin your game play. Rules in games are
1
Overload Pocket Media’s Game Design Document Template
8
typically applied to a game’s behaviors, objects and properties. These rules then
define how elements within the game interact, resulting in corresponding
relationships. These relationships then make up the core game play (Fullerton, Swain
and Hoffman, 2004). The game designer has tools available to determine the
relationship of objects, properties and behaviors in a game. These tools being
guideline methods, with these methods, it can be determined how to make efficient
rules. There can be many problems when dealing with rules in a game. Terms like
dominant strategies and loop holes come to mind when we discuss the typical kind of
game play bugs (Crawford, 2003).
How do we keep all these rules, properties, and objects sorted? Tools like flow charts
and matrixes can be a useful way of documenting these and the relationships
between them. The flow chart can be a great way to track how objects, proprieties
and behaviors interact. This allows the designer to keep track of the relationships
created by his or her rules. It can be handy to know when iteration is made to the
rules of the game to know all the elements that will be affected by the iteration.
Another way of understanding relationships between objects, properties and
behaviors is to create a game matrix. In essence a cross reference chart in which it is
easy to find very technical data about a game object’s properties. These tools of
course don’t guarantee a perfect game design but it is important to know these are
just some of the ways you can change and update your design documentation, while
keeping track of the effects that the iterations are having on your rule system
(Rollings and Morris, 2004).
3.5 Game Design Theory
Game Design Theory is not to be confused with the mathematical equations of game
theory. Game Design theory is more an art than a science. In principle game design
theory are the bits of information a person can use as guidelines when designing a
game, the type of information used is heavily influenced by game design
methodologies. The majority of game design theory is the result of more experienced
game designers having made mistakes and then having defined ways to avoid
making those same mistakes (Rouse, 2001). It should be mentioned that game
design theory could also include a general knowledge of social, psychological and
marketing game issues. Game design theory has many elements focusing upon
helping the designer to create game rules. If effect these theories are much like
guidelines that the designer can choose to use or to ignore. When talking about
game design theory we have to list a few of the most well known issues. One such
theory is that of Emergent Game Play. Emergent game play is all the play that occurs
in your game that was not planned for. This can sometimes be positive or negative
event (Cook, 2002). Another familiar thing we must eventually encounter in game
design is dominant strategies. Dominant strategies, a result of emergent game play,
are when players find a single in way in which to always win the game. Once a
dominant strategy is found in a game it can make all other features in the game
irrelevant (Chris Crawford, 2003). Another theory that we must understand is that of
Player Reward. This theory is concerned with keeping the game flow moving forward.
The issue here is a double edge sword, because if we reward the player too much
the game becomes too easy as rewards become too common. On the other hand not
9
enough rewards make a game more difficult and less interesting for the player.
Another theory that is worth taking a look into is that of Information Systems. This is
the theory surrounding the amount of information a player receives during a game.
An example of this would be chess, which is an open information system, while
mastermind is a closed information system (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004).
Game design theories are not common place and there is no formal standard that
has been accepted. Much of what would be considered game design theory is
actually a result of several different methodologies. These are excellent guidelines
based upon the experience of veteran game designers. It is essential that when we
create our game play that we can back it up with at least a few of these theories, but
like all theories they are only that. There are no laws that you have to follow them, but
to ignore the experience they represent would be serious error in judgment. Due to
the lack of a consistency in methodologies it is up the individual to organize and
utilize the current methodologies as game design theory. It is even advisable that a
designer should create his or her own guidelines. It may seem pretentious but it
should be a natural progression for a designer that wants to dig deeper into the art of
game design. This encouragement to formulate your own theories about games can
only benefit game designers who are interested understanding how to design games
better.
3.6 The Game Designer
A game designer develops the layout, concept and game play of a video or computer
game. This may include playfield design, specification writing, and entry of numeric
properties that balance and tune the game play. A game designer works for a
developer. This person usually has a lot of writing experience and may even have a
degree in writing or a related field. This person's primary job function is writing, so the
more experience they have with the activity, the better. Some art and programming
skills are also helpful for this job, but are not strictly necessary. Game designers often
have studied relevant liberal arts such as psychology, sociology, drama, or
philosophy (Wikipedia, 2005). As a game designer you have the responsibility for the
player’s playing experience.
“The role of the game designer, first and foremost, is to be the advocate for the
player. The game designer must look at the world through the player’s eyes. As a
game designer, a large part of you role is to keep your concentration focused upon
the player experience.”
- (Fullerton, Swain and Hoffman, 2004)
Over the years the role of a game designer has slowly become better defined in the
video game industry. In the board industry there has always been an equivalent of
the game designer, the game inventor. Some differences in a game designer and a
game inventor are that game designers require a broader knowledge of current
technology. Game Inventors, because they usually create physical games, in general
have no need for programming skills or knowledge of large scale production. Further
more it is only a recent trend that there are game designers educated specifically for
game design. This is sure to be an interesting trend that is will change many things
10
about the game designer. Another issue to point out is that there are a lot of
companies that make games that still do not understand the value or role of the game
designer (Fullerton, Swain and Hoffman, 2004).
Designing a game is about creating a solid foundation for game development and
game play. It is not just about creating a concept and calling it a game design, it is
about an awareness of the relationships that occur between a game’s rules, objects
and narration. By understanding the theoretical relationships, the game designer’s
primary purpose is that of creating an enjoyable experience for the player.
A methodical approach to game design and working efficiently with others are all
tasks of the game designer. The game designer should follow a process that includes
pre-software testing, insightful documentation and make the development process as
efficient as possible. The game designer is also about selling the game idea to his
development team. This is done with communication skills and using them to
communicate a wide range of subjects to different audiences. Game designers also
need to know how to listen so that you never miss a great idea to include into a
design.2
3.7 Game Design Conclusion
Game Design would require a research paper unto its self. The reader should have a
general idea of what game design entails and some of the more important aspects of
game design. Key elements of game design are remembering the player, knowing
your game design theory and understanding the purpose of game rules. This now
leads us to game design process methodologies and guideline methodologies used
to enhance our abilities to design games.
2
Portfolio Introduction
11
Game Designer Interviews (Introduction)
Through out this paper various Game designers in the Netherlands have been
interviewed concerning current game design methodologies. These chapters will
demonstrate which methods are in use and which are not. Further more, this is a
great example discourse by anecdote. This should provide some unique insight into
the current state of the Dutch world of game design. The interviews that take place
in these chapters have been done personally or by e-mail correspondence. In the
case of the live interviews, quotes will be compiled from notes taken during the
interview. Interviews conducted via e-mail will be quoted exactly.
The game designers that are interviewed in these sections are game designers that
currently work here in the Netherlands. This has been done on purpose, with the
intention of giving the reader a feel for what methods game designers here in the
Netherlands are using. Knowing that a great many of us will at some time or another
work in game industry here in the Netherlands, it is perhaps best to get a feel for the
methods are currently used here at home. Why contact with these game designers
for an interview? These interviews provide the chance for us to hear directly from
those that are working with these methods in the real world. It has been suggested
that academics lack an unrealistic view of the industry, so what I would like to show
here is that methodologies are not just for academic contemplation. For academics
to research and improve methodologies, they must be proven to work to in the
industry.
12
Game Designer Interview (Guerrilla)

When arranging these interviews I select companies rather than specific game
designers. The first company I made contact with was Guerrilla, which is best known
for Kill Zone, its resent hit on the PS2. Brian Reynolds is eight year old veteran of
the game industry and is the current the Game Designer at Guerrilla. Prior to
Guerrilla, Brain worked at Biz Entertainment in the UK. Biz Entertainment was
known for titles such as State of Emergency and Evil Dead 2.
MH: What is your definition of a game design process or method?
Brian Reynolds: “The process should follow as: concept then game design. Where
the concept is the idea and the game design is the intention. This is fairly standard
and can find this as the most standardized method in the industry. As for having a
standardized vocabulary and defined concepts, it’s a great idea. When I first started
working at Guerilla for instance, they had a term ‘Frictions’. This I later discovered
was their term for low level AI.”
MH: What is your ideal game design process?
Brian Reynolds: “It would involve a longer pre-production phase. The current
methods have a very short pre-production phase compared with the film industry for
instance. The pre-production could be used to really work out ideas for the game.
This longer pre-production phase could be composed of just a small team using a
trial and error method to design the game. “
MH: What is an important element in your game design process?
Brian Reynolds: “The player’s experience is what I like to focus on. What the player
does not see or experience directly during game play shouldn’t be included.”
MH: Is there a future for game design methods?
Brian Reynolds: “Yes but they will be slow to develop and it will be a long time
before something formal that everyone will use to become standardized.”
13
4 Game Design Methods
4.1 Introduction
Game Design Methods are for planning and defining game play. Game design
methods are intended for game design and not to marketing, management or
production. Game design methods are also intended to be used as tools for game
design and should be used as such. Methods are also relatively abstract notions that
can be applied to numerous situations. Lastly a method requires some sort of formal
structure in which it is organized (Kremeier, 2003). This chapter will list and describe
the current game design methods in use. The purpose of this chapter is to give you a
general understanding of these methods. Note that we will discuss more on the idea
that methods are accepted tools for game design. This will allow use to remain
focused upon the issue at hand, instead of getting into the argument as to whether or
not methods should even be used. It is important to keep in mind there is some vocal
opposition to the idea of creating methods (Kremeier, 2003).
This chapter has been oriented in such a way that we will first address the game
design methods that have died out and then discuss current methods that are in use.
The current methods are split into two categories. The first category is about the
game design process. Game Design process is about how to go about structuring,
communicating and planning a design. The second category is about the tools
offered by methods that can be used as guidelines for designing games. This chapter
should further more be a useful compendium of the known methods used for game
design. Each method described in this chapter has been described in such a way to
cover the most important aspects and each section will cover the method’s general
definition, describe the main points and how best to use the method in question. In
later chapters these sections will be come important reference points for the reader.
4.2 Early Game Design Methods
4.2.1 Cowboy Game Design
What is meant by cowboy game design method? The cowboy is notorious for being a
loner and this is a great way to describe this process. This is the outdated method of
the single person doing the design, programming and art by him or herself. The one
man show is really a relic from birth of computer games. Why should this be
mentioned when discussing current game design methods? That is because there
quite a few individuals that believe they can still make games this way. The majority
of flash games are result of this process of design. This way of designing games has
been completely abandoned when it comes to the standards of the industry and the
multi-million dollar games produced for the PC and consoles. To be fair, this method
is still employed in the other game industries. In the board game industry for
example, this method is still standard practice, but rely heavily upon iterative design
during their game design process.
14
“The traditional designer is a cowboy designer. Modern game designs are the result
of the messy, content dependent process a cowboy designer intuitively follows when
building a game.”
-(Danc, 2004)
To understand the cowboy methodology we need to understand the development

and history of the lone game programmer. At this point board game inventors will be
excluded as to focus upon the unique growing pains that video game design has
gone through. The early game designers where experts in their fields of programming
and possessed deep intuitive understanding of what worked and what didn't. Even
today these game designers reign supreme in the game design world. Just to name a
few of these trail blazing game designers we would find such names as Sid Meier,
Danielle Bunten Berry, Chris Crawford and Richard Gariott. Their generation of game
designers made a taboo of methodologies, team work and even coding standards.
Many design decisions seemed to have been made arbitrary and this lead to
problems when the industry matured. Many projects failed when they became
bogged down with bugs (Danc, 2004).
During a lecture that Chris Crawford gave in Maastricht in 2005, he related a story of
how he had used profanity in his coding as his own personal joke, but this turned to
be embarrassing when he had to show his code. This is a great example how
secluded a nature the first designers operated in. The issues that seem to plague the
cowboy game designers have usually been two things. One the lack of process and
second the lack planning. It doesn’t take an expert to realize such methods can only
get you so far. How can we best identify cowboy methodology? Described below is a
list of attributes derived from sources. Mostly old stories from the good old days of
game design. Here is a list of identifiable points:
- Usually a one man team.

- Someone that does the programming, art, game design and audio by him or
herself.
- No planning.
- No Testing.
- Uses own vocabulary.
What could possibly be the benefit of cowboy game design? Well it has created some
of classic games for one. The other benefit that is derived from this method was the
realization that better methodology was needed. Lastly this is how some of the best
known game designers grew up. There are also present benefits from this method in
the form of flash games, which has the potential of being a creative birthing ground.
As we continue through this chapter, we will explore the current game design
methods. All of these methods where created in response to cowboy design methods
or lack of methods.
15
4.2.2 Storyboarding
One of the earliest attempts to create a game design process was to create a
storyboard. This method was barrowed from film and artist attempted to describe the
game with a sequence of drawings. It is important to mention that this was a method
used to try to give artists control of the game design. This was quite an issue in the
beginning and is even now a topic of discussion. Chris Crawford’s colorful lecture in
Maastricht in 2005, discussed the issues that face artist and programmers. Like
Crawford’s opinion that artist should be given the tools by programmers to create
games. Storyboarding allows the artist to create a visual game design document.
Storyboarding suffers from the lack concrete information about the actual game play
and often was too focused on the story and visuals. Storyboarding is still used but
along side of documentation produced by a game designer (Rouse, 2001). While
storyboarding primarily is used by film there are a few particular points that allow
storyboarding to be an effective method for game design. Storyboarding allows a
flexible way to work with a storyline. Because storyboarding is in effect a lose series
of comics, the designer can switch the sequence around as needed. The storyboard
also acts a visual reference during a project. This becomes the visual communicator
during the project. Storyboarding also brings together the visual effects. This is where
a unified vision of the design can be expressed. Next, storyboarding offers a camera
view of a game. This is an excellent way to get a sense of what the game could look
like from the player’s perspective. To summarize the points of storyboarding they
would be:
- Easy Management of the Narrative

- Visual Team Communication
- Unified Visual Effects
- Camera View
(Sotomeyer, 2002)
Today we often hear that that storyboarding is regulated to storyline and animation
issues of the game. There are some useful tools that continue today such as mock
ups that are still used in other methods to communicate game design. Games,
because they are about game play which relies on rules, objects and properties; have
difficulty being expressed by storyboards alone.
16
4.3 Game Design Process Methods
4.3.1 Design Bible Method
The bible method consists of documenting your game design in a game design
document. The purpose of the document is to provide blue print for the game used
during development. This document can range from very large documents to very
small documents. There is no particular standard for these documents. These
documents may even contain several sub-documents and even be modular. This
method is established as a standard method of game design in the game industry.
“On the surface, it is a standard method (there is consensus that some amount of
documentation is always needed), yet the details a design document should contain
are often debated.”
- (Ryan, 1999)
The Design Document arose from the need of communicating a design to a game
development team. When teams started to become large and games became more
complex, the document preserved the main elements of the game’s design. This was
already a standard practice for the software industry and was carried over quite early
to the game industry. The planning provided by the game design document solved
the problems experienced by cowboy designers whom designed as they developed.
A good introduction to what a game design document should entail is ‘Game Design
and Architecture’ by Andrew Rollings and Dave Morris. While the book is not
dedicated only to game design documents it has valuable insight into the game
design document. Another source that was great for pointing out game design
document faults was ‘Game Theory and Practice’ by Rouse III, this yet another book
that covers game design but has a good section of commentaries about game design
documents. Another book that also has an extensive template example for a game
design document is ‘Game Design Workshop’ by Tracy Fullerton, Christopher Swain
and Steven Hoffman. This book has an example of a design document and
demonstrates how the game design document can be used with the iterative design
method. Another handy resource for information about design documents is from
Chris Taylor, who even provides a game design document template at his website.
Having the ability to create a design document is a key to any game designer even if
you use other methodologies.
The game Design document was the result of increased size of development teams.
As these teams grew in size it became more of an issue to maintain the focus of the
project. As members of those teams grew more specialized a reference document
became necessary. This resulted in the design document, the art bible, the technical
document and other such helpful reference documents (Rouse, 2001). Not all game
documents are the same and different documents are used in different companies
depending on the scope of the game. In describing the main points of a game design
document, the details of the exact contents of the documents are not that necessary.
How ever a list of document types compiled from a variety of sources will give the
reader an idea of the documentation that can be used in the bible method. Below are
document types that the game designer may be involved in while creating a game:
17
- Concept Document or Design Treatment

- Game Design Document or Core Mechanics Document
- Technical Document or Product Specification Document
- Copy Document or Screenplay Document
- Art Bible or Art Tome
The Concept Document or Design Treatment is a document that is used to describe

in very general terms the game. This is best for introducing the idea for the first time
and avoids a hundred page game design document as the introduction to the game.
The game design document or core mechanics document is where information about
the game is available. This becomes the primary source for recording ideas for game
play. The technical, screenplay and art documents are focused more into the
specifics of a specialized task. These documents form the core to the bible method
design process. These documents are by no means the sole responsibility of the
game designer and usually tend to be collaboration with a specialist. The game
designer tends to be ultimately responsible for the guarding the vision of the game
(Laramee, 1999). We should keep in mind several things when discussing this
method. First, that not all game design documents are created equally, because
game design documents have not been standardized each one is different. Rouse
creates an interesting list of typical problems that found with game design
documents.
- The Wafer-Thin: Not enough information.

- Ellipsis Special Document: Lack of relevant content.
- Story Tome: Only about the storyline and back story.
- The Overkill Document: Too much detail.
- Pie-in-the-Sky Document: Technically un-realistic.
- The Fossilized Document: A document that is not updated with current
changes to the design.
The design document approach is not entirely accepted as the absolute standard of
game design. When a document is taken to the extremes it can become unworkable.
Documents with too much detail can become too high maintenance to be kept
updated. In practice, smaller documents that use treatments and outlines seem to be
the most useful (Kremeier, 2003). If we can over come previously mentioned faults in
game design documentation, rigid adherent to the document and making it difficult to
update these documents, then this method is extremely useful even in combination
with other game design processes. It is advised that game designers should look into
information architecture as a tool when presenting information in your documents. As
the author of a game design document you are responsible for getting information
across to the people that use it. There for tailored made information should be used
as it can only benefit readers of your document.
18
4.3.2 Iterative Design
Test, test and test again! That is the motto of the iterative game design process.
Iterative design is perhaps the most recently defined method for a game design
process. Iterative design is the game design process of testing and changing your
game design based upon test results. Game design is always requires the creation
and modification of the rules of a game’s system. The quality of that system and its
game play is the result of how well the rules are balanced. The creation and
modification of these rules are constantly being tested and evaluated. Suggesting
iteration; which means that game design is inherently iterative.
“You can think of the rules as the DNA of the complex emergent system we call the
game.”
- (Cook, 2000)
The iterative game design method goes beyond just creating and modifying rules.
This method also gives its users guidelines as to when iterations should be made.
Iterative design is perhaps the newest method of game design process and there are
currently many sources that promote this system. Iterative Design has also been
referred to as evolutionary design. Daniel Cook and his article ‘Evolutionary Design:
A practical process for creating great game designs’, describes iterative design as
evolutionary. Cook delves into evolutionary design process by relating to designing
board games. Taking this a step further Tracy Fullerton, Christopher Swain and
Steven Hoffman go into iterative design extensively in their book ‘Game Design
Workshop’. They promote a bible method after prototyping and game testing an
iterative design. ‘Rules of Play’ by Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman use iterative
game has their underlining theme. They promote iterative design that goes along with
project working.
Iterative design is the latest result in designers trying to create methods in which to
issue better game design. While most board game inventors follow an iterative
design process, most digital game designers do or did not. Typically, a commercial
computer game may be designed in advance, with storyboards and design
documents, completed before any actual game production begins. These documents
invariably become obsolete as soon as development starts (Salen and Zimmerman,
2004). We can also take note here that iterative design is in many ways a response
to the faults of the bible method of game design. With such great variations in
documentation, the bible method designs can be either too complicated or
incomplete. The bible method also tended to wait until the last moment to test game
play. This exemplifies how game design methods are growing and designer’s
growing need to find methodologies that they can rely upon to create new games.
What are the main points of iterative design? These points are result of a variety of
sources that discuss the iterative design method.
- Define the fundamental rules of your concept

- Play through the rules.
- Observe player interaction with rules and game system
- Identify problem with rules and system
- Modify problem areas within rules and system structure
19
- Return to step one
The first point refers to creating the basic rule system, based upon the games core
game play. This will become your starting point. Playing through the rules will give
you a first hand experience of the game’s game play. This is to be followed up with
testers who will play through the rules while the designer observes. Through the
testing it will be up to the designer to then identify the problems with the rules or the
system. This leads to the next step of modifying these rules. The last step is to do it
again. When using this process the designer needs to keep in mind certain issues.
The game designer must remember that the usage of iterative design is to create a
finished game, so the number of times iterations can occur is a matter of following the
defined scope of the game. Continual changing of the fundaments of the game will
lead to the game development’s demise. Thus the cycle of iterations should be come
less and less as development continues (Fullerton, Swain and Hoffman, 2004).
Iterative design process can be a powerful tool, but it seems to me that unless
efficiently used, a game could be caught in a continual iterative process. Testing
needs to be central to the design and play testing should be about game play not just
how much of prototype or the game you have ready. What are we testing after all if
we can not test core game play? Take note that iterative design fails to address the
communication issue. The design in its entirety must be communicated effectively to
your team during production even as it changes. Iterative design should be used only
in certain cases. Some games just do not require iterative design. This is not to say
that they don’t require testing. The fact is that a lot of games are clones, and to use
iterative design on clones seems to be an inefficient way of using this process. On
the other hand experimental games and original ideas can only benefit from this
process. Another issue of iterative design that is always unclear is the usage of
documentation. Documentation is not a high priority in iterative design and it is
usually suggested to create documentation only after all the testing and prototypes. A
danger of this is that iterative design can create an excuse for designers to skip
documentation all together.
20
4.3.3 Cabal Game Design Process
The Cabal game design process is best described as a coming together of minds. A
cabal is away to describe a group of people coming together in conspiring way. A
game design cabal indicates that there is a select group that works together on a
design of the game. This group is usually composed of leads and together they
decide issues pertaining to the rules and system. Cabal design is highly compatible
with iterative design and bible method design. Valve used this process during the
development of the well known game Half-Life. Ken Birdwell the senior engineer at
Value relates his experience of Valve’s implementation of the cabal process. This
process is not unique in anyway to Valve, as most students at the HKU experience
this first hand the first time the have to create a game with a group of people. Birdwell
explains the Cabal process:
"We would create our own idea by combining the strengths of a cross section of the
company; putting them together in a group we called the "Cabal."
The goal of this group was to create a complete document that detailed all the levels
and described major monster interactions, special effects, plot devices, and design
standards.”
- (Birdwell, 1999)
In his article about cabal design, Birdwell indicates that the Cabal was formed when
they felt that no single game designer could fill their requirements. In many ways it
makes sense that when a game’s design becomes such a massive task. This
process is also used quite often by students at the HKU. This creates an atmosphere
so that everyone has a chance to contribute. The main points of a Cabal combined
with other methods are listed:
- The game design is created collaboratively

o Include a lead from each department (programming, art, and so on).
o A Cabal requires constant meetings
o Team communication is a must in a Cabal
o Be efficient in culling ideas
- A cabal could use the Bible process or Iterative process
The way the Cabal is used will determine the overall success of using this process so
it is imperative to understand how best to use this it when designing a game. It is
suggested that this is not the ideal situation for everyone. If the correct elements are
in place this could work brilliantly if not it could become a disaster. The cabal is
particularly vulnerable personality types. Strong personalities, people with poor
communication skills or people that don’t work well in a group can cause a cabal to
fail.
“Practically speaking, not everyone is suited for this kind of group design activity.”
- (Birdwell, 1999)
The biggest advantage of the cabal process is that a lot of different ideas are
presented. These ides can complement each other and the large number of ideas
presented allows for choosing only the best. The biggest pit fall of Cabal design is
21
that there has to be a clear and well defined organization when it comes to the
meetings. One thing that is difficult about cabal design is that in an unstructured
setting, parts of the design can be scraped on basis that it doesn’t suite someone’s
playing style of game. When working through a Cabal process it is important to hold
to the high level game design as a guide. Otherwise a design can change very
quickly from one genre to another or worse become a half breed of compromises.
The Cabal can be a long and complicated process and requires good synergy,
communication and leadership.
22
4.4 Game Design Guideline Methods
4.4.1 Discourse by Anecdote
Discourse by anecdote is a way of passing on game design experience by the way of

a narrative or an interview. These discourses then relate the game designer’s
experiences in game design. These discourses when compiled would form the basis
of this method. This method then would be built upon a set abstract ideas formed
from the reader’s interpretations. For example Gamasutra’s many interviews and
articles act as a collective volume for this method. Discourse by anecdote is a game
design method that is a result of Chris Crawford’s collection of ‘Game Design
Perspectives’ and ‘Chris Crawford’s Art of Computer Game Design’. This method is
also considered the predecessor of the Pattern Method. Discourse by anecdote is the
basis for our understanding of such terms and ideas as:
- Triangulrities
- Asymmetric Relationships
- Stmetrical Relationships
- Dominant Strategies
These terms are of course presented to us by different writes such as Ernst Adams,
Chris Crawford and Andrew Rollings. It is certain that this method has created more
than just this vocabulary, as this was one of the first methods for deriving experience
from game designers and still is perhaps one the most functional today. The
narrative, anecdotal representation of knowledge is the predecessor of the pattern
method. Thus the pattern method appears intuitive and accessible without requiring
training or adherence to strict form. Typically, a particular insight is described as a
specific incident or concrete example. The most common problem with anecdotes is
that they do not lend themselves to placing individual insight into a context of
established knowledge. Anecdotes often don't use existing terminology, or worse,
they redefine established terms (Kreimeier, 2003). This method is by far the most
extensive method available to game designers today. With the abundance of articles,
books and interviews, this method for learning game design guidelines is perhaps the
most widely used method today. This method will never be replaced by formal
methods as formal methods require an agreement by the game design community to
use them as a standard. What we can hope for is, as the community of game
designers slowly create more uniformed concepts and vocabulary that they will be
related in anecdote form correctly and without contradictions.
23
4.4.2 400 Rules
The 400 Rules project is a set of rules to guide game design. The 400 Rules are
actually not 400 but about twenty-nine rules proposed by experienced game
designers. These rules are created with strict guidelines so that they remain
functional as tools for the designer. The 400 Rules method is a result of a lecture at
GDC 2001 by Hal Barwood. The rough number that he used was then used for the
name of this methodology. Since this its conception, Noah Falstein has been the
drive behind the growth and development of this project. The 400 Rules project has
grown and rules are the result of such game designers as Hal Barwood (Indiana
Jones and the Infernal Machine), Noah Falstein (Sinistar), Dave Grossman, Sid
Meier (Civilization), Teut Weidemann (Secret Wars), Jurie Horneman (GTA: Vice
City) and many more. There are two main issues to the 400 Rules methodology.
Issue one is, what are the rules to making a rule? The second issue is what are the
current rules? The Inspiracy, which is the group responsible for the 400 Rules project
created a system for creating rules. There are five steps to creating a rule for the 400
Rules project:
1. A concise, imperative statement of the rule, both as a sentence and paragraph

2. Its domain of application (both its hierarchy, e.g. a rule about rules, a rule
about the development process, or just a rule about games themselves, and
genre, e.g. Applies only to RTS games or Online games.
3. Rules that it trumps (over which this rule takes precedence):
4. Rules that it is trumped by
5. An example or two from well-known published games, if applicable, as well as
counter-examples that show the consequences of not following the rule
Next, a list of these rules is provided. These rules are meant to be self explanatory,
so further details about individual rules will not be explained further. Below is the
most current list of rules created by the 400 Rules project:
1. Provide Clear Short-Term Goals

2. Provide Parallel Challenges with Mutual Assistance
3. Fight Player Fatigue
4. Maximize Expressive Potential
5. Maintain Level of Abstraction
6. Concretize Ideas
7. Make Subgames
8. Let the Player Turn the Game Off
9. Identify Constraints
10. Maintain Suspension of Disbelief
11. Emphasize Exploration and Discovery
12. Turn Constants into Variables
13. Differentiate Interactivity from Non-Interactivity
14. Localize Narrative with a Two Step Process
15. Distribute Game Assets Asymmetrically
16. Begin at the Middle
17. Balance Units Starting with the Middle of the Pack
18. Make the Game Fun for the Player, not the Designer or Computer
24
19. Make the Effects of the AI Visible to the Player

20. Use Real-World Formulas and Minimize Cheating with Simulations
21. Add a Small Amount of Randomness to AI Calculations
22. Create AI in the Mind of the Player
23. Don’t Penalize the Player
24. Provide an Enticing Long Term Goal
25. Make the First Player Action Painfully Obvious
26. Keep the Interface Consistent (many trumps of this one)
27. Be Consistent in Feedback to the Player
28. Implement the Hardest Part of the Game First
29. Provide a Consistent Single Vision for the Game
These rules can be great tools as long as we understand how to use them. Falstein
further recommends that these be used in conjunction with iterative design. Further
more these rules must not become rigid like engineering techniques to create a
template for game design or to be a game design generating machine. One method
of use is to apply the rules when you get stuck in a game design, looking for insights
on how to resolve your problem. Another is to go through the rules and consider your
design in the light of each rule, looking for ways to use them to modify your design.
These rules after all can be bent or even broken. In the end the 400 Rules are tools
that are relatively concrete and practical. They are not intended to become pure
academic discourse. To apply them successfully will always require certain amount
common sense from the game designer (Kreimeier, 2003). The 400 rules are a great
way to look over your design and compare. Unlike game design patterns the 400
Rules aimed at a player’s experience instead of game mechanics. Comparing these
rules with your current design can be very beneficial and a great way to gain insight
into your design’s fundaments.
25
4.4.3 FADT (Formal Abstract Design Tools)
The formal abstract design tool method is about creating common language as well
as understanding patterns. FADT is formal because there is a definitive definition that
is associated with the tool. It is also abstract because these tools are meant to focus
upon the underlining ideas specific to genre construct. The idea that they are tools is
that they will form a common vocabulary. In this way FADT becomes a set of formal
guidelines to create a common language. This common language is then built around
defined patterns found in game design (Kreimeier, 2003). FADT is the brainchild of
Doug Church (Game Designer from Ion Storm). Church proposed this game design
method in 1999 in attempt to have more specific approach to game design. Church
argued that every profession has a common set of jargon that is used to
communicate ideas. Doctors for instance know all the body parts in Latin. Even
gamers develop jargon around their favorite games. At the point of FADT’s
conception, game designers spoke mostly in terms of is this “fun” or “not fun,” and
then the analysis stopped there.
“Whether or not a game is fun is a good place to start, but as designers, our job
demands we go deeper.”
- (Church, 1999)
Like all methods there is a method for creating the tools that will be used as the
method. Church has setup the following guidelines to describe how a FADT is
created.
! Formal: Objective; we should be able to say that the concept definitely is or is

not present in a game. This should be able to be reproduced with near perfect
accuracy no matter how many people you ask.
! Abstract: The core concept behind something, not just one particular,
concrete, instance.
! Design: The task at hand.
! Tool: The concept should be useful for creating games, not simply talking
about existing ones, or some other purpose.
“Above all, our goal is to create better games. To do that, we try to create better
tools.”
- (Hale-Evans, 2004)
The following list of terms, are synonyms, they can cross reference each other, and
some are software related. This is of course an illustration of the difficulty of
separating design concepts from development procedures (Kreimeier, 2003). Here
below is an attempt to list as many these tools as possible. Unfortunately we are left
with a large list of these tools and find that the definitions are not always clear.
- Challenge-Reward Pair
- Conditional
- Congruence
- Deterministic Finite Opponent
- Event Based Music
26
- Formal Abstract Design Tool

- Graphics [sic]
- Globally Consistent Response
- Homogeneity
- I-World
- Model
- Nondeterministic Finite Opponent
- Overworld
- Ownership
- Parallel Interface Animation
- Power-Up
- Rule of Logic
- Setback
- Single-State Opponent
- Trigger
- Universally Anticipated Response
- Willing Suspension of Disbelief
- World Register
- World State
FADT his meant to carry over a into the game design process. While this process is
very abstract it becomes more of a guideline to the process. This can be very helpful
to guiding the focus of the process, but these guidelines are bit too narrow to
encompass all games.
- INTENTION: Making a plan of one's own creation in response to the current

situation in the game world and one's understanding of the game play options.
- PERCEIVED CONSEQUENCE: A clear reaction from the game world to the
action of the player.
- STORY: The narrative thread, whether designer-driven or player-driven, that
binds events together and drives the player forward towards completion of the
game.
(Church, 1999)
I think it is fitting to have this quote to sum up the Formal Abstract Desgn Tool
method:
“The primary inhibitor of design evolution is the lack of a common design vocabulary.
Most professional disciplines have a fairly evolved language for discussion.”
- (Church, 1999)
27
4.4.4 Pattern Method
Game design pattern are conventions for describing and documenting recurring
design decisions within game design. Specific patterns are the result of applying this
method consistently, leading to collections of design patterns which have been
assigned a name and are documented by an anecdotal or abstract description.
Pattern methods provide semi-formal tools for problems in which rigorously formal
methods cannot easily be applied or are simply not available. The Pattern Method
proposes to adopt pattern formalism for game design, based on the work of
Christopher Alexander. Alexandrian patterns are simple collections of reusable
solutions to solve recurring problems. Formal Abstract Design Tools and the 400
rules project have the same objective: to establish a formal means of describing,
sharing and expanding knowledge about game design (Kreimeier, 2002). Game
Design Patterns takes a similar approach as FADT and the 400 rules project. Each
tries to give the designer tools in which to use when designing. A lot of work on game
design pattern is a result of the work between the game design community and the
research community. Jussi Holopainen and Staffan Björk are some of leading
researches in defining game design patterns. They have been giving lectures on
game design patterns as recently as the 2003 GDC conference on the subject of the
game design patterns. Like FADT and the 400 rules Patterns require rules to identify
and create a pattern. Here below is a template for identifying and defining a game
design pattern.
- Name: "Naming a pattern immediately increases our design vocabulary. It lets

us design at a higher level of abstraction".
- Problem: This describes the problem, including its inherent trade-offs and the
context in which the problem occurs.
- Solution: A description of a general arrangement of entities and mechanisms
that can be used to solve the problem.
- Consequences: Each solution has its own trade offs and consequences.
Solutions can, in turn, cause or amplify other problems. The costs and benefits
of a solution should be understood and compared against those of alternatives
before making a design decision. (Kreimeier, 2002)
This pattern template has in turn been used to create and define current patterns in
game design. Here below is a list of some of current game design patterns. Currently
the number of patterns identified and listed is upwards to two-hundred.
- Perceived Chance to Succeed

- Analysis Paralysis
- Mutual Goal
- Shared Reward
- Anonymous Trading:
- Complex Commodities:
- Computerized Clues:
- Secret Partnerships:
- Active surface:
- Espionage:
- Ubiquitous Information:
28
- Filter
- Proxy
- Predictable Consequence
- Paper-Rock-Scissors
- Privileged Move
- Weenie
- Weenie Chain
(Björk and Holopainen, 2005)
Patterns are created with the intention of giving the game designer support in
development of the initial game design. They lend a hand in problem solving
particular interaction problems between elements in a game. Patterns are only useful
as long as one can learn to apply them with reasonable effort and that they can be
tailored to any given project. Patterns can also be a source of inspiration as well as
creative design tools. Another big aspect of patterns is that communication with peers
and professionals is enhanced. Patterns are descried in such a way that they even
have a final target audience. Patterns can be applicable for project leader leading a
large group, a new designer daunted by the task of completing one’s first game
concept or an interested hobbyist (Björk and Holopainen, 2005).
29
4.4.5 Lexicon Approach
Unlike the previous game design methods, the Lexicon method is concerned with
game design vocabulary. This approach is about creating a unified language for
game designers and developers. This unified terminology is about creating a
vocabulary that can be used in professional settings. The Lexicon method is in
response to the creation of FADT, Patterns and 400 rules. As each method continues
to create more definitions, game designers need a shared vocabulary available so
that definitions that have the same meaning can be recognized. The lexicon system
was first initiated when Gamasutra set up a lexicon forum in response to the FADT
system. This forum no longer exists but the idea of creating and using more and
more appropriate vocabulary lives on.
Examples of what would belong to the game design lexicon would have to be
universal that everyone would recognize them. At the moment it seems that lexicons
system changes from developer to developer. In an interview with Brian Reynolds of
Guerillia, he related a story of his experience with the change of vocabulary. Prior to
his employment at Guerillia, what he knew as ‘low level AI’ was deemed ‘frictions’ at
Guerillia. This vocabulary change that can take place can be something as simple as
calling power-ups, rewards. Unfortunately the lexicon system that was started by
gamasutra.com seems to have been lost when they decided that it was growing out
of control (Kreimeier, 2003). The experience can be some what annoying when trying
to communicate ideas when the vocabulary is incorrect. Terms used that can be
interchangeable. For example platform can be interchangeable as a game genre or
game console. It would seem that this method should get more attention, because it
requires more development. The sooner a clear and formal lexicon system is created
the sooner small misunderstandings will be resolved.
“…a design vocabulary is our tool kit to pick apart games and take the parts which
resonate with us to realize our own game vision, or refine how our own games work.”
- (Church, 1999)
30
4.4.6 Game Design Taxonomy
Yet another method is that of game design taxonomy method. This is a method that
attempts to create a tool for analysis. Having this high level game design tool allows
the creation of a method that can be used to classify game designs. This
classification can then describe type of game play in one clssification. In simple terms
this method can help discover the game’s genre (Lindley, 2003). This method is a
result of too many low level game design methods, thus methods that are concerned
with the rules and systems. Taxonomy has primarily been a subject discussed at
Gamasutra by Craig Lindley. Lindley proposes that this follows an orthogonal
taxonomy system. This allows design concerns to be separated. So we can, for
example, consider whether a game is a real-time strategy game or a warfare
simulation, irrespectively of whether it is created for PCs, mobile devices, or
technologically supported physical environments (Lindley, 2003).
Like all methods, Game Design Taxonomy incorporates tools for the designer to use.
This method the game designer must be honest with himself and his design. The first
method of taxonomy is a triangular two dimensional schematic based on:
- Narrative
- Game Play
- Simulation
31
The next method goes further and adds three dimensions, gamboling is added. This
represents the luck factor that is present in the game design.
The next tool available through this method is the tools determining the realities of
the game and how to place those in relationship with each other. As you can see
here we start to get a frame work at a high level about games. This includes all
games.
32
Game design taxonomy is a tool for analyzing a game’s genre and is not to be
confused with game design patterns. The idea is to use these analysis tools to
analysis your game to a point that you can determine the game play gestalt. A game
play gestalt can have many forms for a game, capturing different playing styles,
tactics and approaches to progressing through the game and even winning.
“In general, it is a particular way of thinking about the game state from the
perspective of a player, together with a pattern of repetitive perceptual, cognitive, and
motor operations.”
- (Lindley, 2003)
It is in this way that at a high level design can help us determine the direction of our
game design. This is a useful tool for understanding the points of origin that your
design and elements stem from. Often a game design starts with the intention of
filling a particular genre only to find out at the end managed to slip into another
genre. Further more we can go past genre and point out a design’s unique features.
Lastly, we see once again another attempt at creating a common language that we
can use to communicate about the design of a game.
33
Game Designer Interview (Woedend)

Harm van Dinter currently works for Woedend a up and coming game development studio.
Van Dinter has been involved in the game industry for seven years but has been working
even longer in software development. Van Dinter has been involved with such games as
Knight Rider, Beach Kings and is currently working on his first title for Woedend.
(The following interview was left in Dutch to keep the writers own words intact.)
Harm van Dinter: Dit is de manier om tot je spelontwerp te komen.

In mijn opvatting is er weinig verschil tussen het "game design process" en het
ontwikkeltraject. De stappen in ons ontwikkeltraject zijn als volgt:
1. Conceptidee.
2. Concept fase.
3. Design fase.
4. Preproduction fase.
5. Production fase.
6. Alpha fase.
7. Beta fase.
8. Tweak fase.
9. Master fase.
10. Nazorg fase.
Het concept idee is de basis voor inspiratie. Het is de vonk waaruit het spel
ontworpen wordt. Het moet inspireren tot allerlei nieuwe ideeen.
Het concept is een uitgewerkt concept idee. Er is hier nog geen rekening gehouden
met beperkende factoren. Dit is de basis voor het design. Het gaat hier vooral om de
hoofdlijnen van een spel. Het concept moet een gevoel overbrengen en aanzetten
tot nog meer creativiteit.
In de stappen 3 en 4 worden de grootste design beslissignen genomen. Hier worden

de beperkende factoren bekend. (target platform, productietijd, budget etc.)
In stap 4 bewijs je of je spelconcept werkt. De design fase heeft misschien een
misleidende naam. Hierin wordt namelijk niet het hele design geschreven, maar er
wordt bepaald welke richting het design uit gaat.
In stap 5 wordt de inhoudt verder uitgewerkt en gedetailleerd.
In de stappen 6 t/m 8 wordt er in het ontwerp eigenlijk alleen nog "getweakt".

In de Alpha fase leveren we een spel (De alpha versie) op waar alle game play
geimplementeerd is. (Het spel is feature complete)
In de Beta fase leveren we een spel (De Beta versie) op waarin de applicatie feature
complete is. (Het verschil met de alpha is dat nu ook niet game play gerelateerde
features volledig geimplementeerd zijn. Bijv. het kiezen van een ander uiterlijk van je
karakter)
34
(Continued)
Harm van Dinter: Waar we nu mee bezig zijn.
Harm van Dinter: Je moet eerst de kern van je spel zoeken en daar de rest van je
spel op baseren. Hierdoor neem je alle beslissingen in een logische volgorde. (In
tegenstelling tot het verzinnen van een aantal leuke situaties en daaromheen een
spel maken.)
Hoofdlijnen eerst ontwerpen en testen, daarna steeds verder detailleren. Hierdoor

wordt het risico dat het spel niet leuk wordt kleiner naarmate het project vordert.
(Hoe meer geld er in het project gaat, hoe groter de kans dat het terugverdient
wordt. Let op: Zodra je ziet dat het niet werkt moet je ook stoppen.) (Camera,
controls en characters zijn punten die snel uitgewerkt moeten worden. Deze drie
bepalen hoe het spel aanvoelt.)
Test je ontwerpbeslissingen voordat je verder gaat met het detailleren of

uitbereiden van je spel. Maak prototypes zodat je snel je ontwerp kan testen.
Test zowel met externe partijen als met interne partijen. Test de belangrijkste punten
met je doelgroep en experts.
Overleg vroegtijdig met het kernteam of de wensen haalbaar zijn, want je wil niet te
laat grote ingrepen doen omdat je anders de deadline niet haalt. Deze aanpassingen
zijn altijd zeer slecht voor het spelontwerp, omdat ze gemaakt worden ondertijdsdruk
en omdat je de gevolgen niet precies kan overzien en testen.
Het hele team werkt mee aan het design, want ook de kleine beslissingen zijn
onderdeel van het game design. Ik denk dat dit in alle bedrijven het geval is, maar
het wordt niet altijd onderkend.
Harm van Dinter: De spellen worden steeds groter en gecompliceerder. De

maximale tijd die je kan besteden aan het ontwikkelen van een game blijft stabiel. 5
jaar lijkt zo'n beetje het maximum, omdat je anders door de techniek ingehaald
wordt. Dus moet je in dezelfde tijd steeds meer doen. De productiesnelheid van de
teamleden groeit niet even snel als de complexiteit van de spellen. Dit betekent dat
de teams die de spellen maken groter moeten worden. De grootste uitdaging is het
overzien van de ontwerpbeslissingen die genomen worden in het (steeds groter
wordende) ontwikkelteam. Het game design proces moet hiervoor veel
ondersteuning bieden
35
5 Questions concerning Game Design Methods
5.1 Introduction
Methodology is sometimes used synonymously with "method," particularly a

complex method or body of methods, rules, and postulates employed by a discipline.
Some usage arbiters regard this usage as pretentious and questionable (Wikipedia,
2005). Game design also has its methodologies as well. They are less defined than
in other fields but none the less they are slowly starting to be standardized. Game
Design Method is also interchangeable with Game Design Process and Game
Design Guidelines. I would like my reader to understand that these are all one and
the same. This subject might be a bit a illusive to game designers at first, but
understanding the current methodologies will be a integral part of functioning as a
game designer in the future.
“Compared with the vast body of operational knowledge found in the world of
filmmaking, the game design community is just beginning to articulate the concepts
and techniques specific to our medium in order to establish methods of game
design.”
- (Church, 1999)
In the industries of film, software development and interaction media methods of

design have been implemented. Software development even has its methodology
narrowed to thick, hybrid and thin methodologies. While the film industries standards
of design revolve around screen writing and storyboarding. These industries have all
determined that certain activities form the core aspect of their designing.
Documentation is a recurrent theme in all these industries. Documentation of course
is a chance for the designer to really think out the design and make it concrete. The
next recurrent is that a process for the design to occur is first formulated. For
instance the film industry tends to spend more time in pre-production than game
industry does. The last recurrence is the reliance on guidelines to create their design.
Film guidelines for camera angles are extensive and have become the central dogma
for how the camera is used (Barfield, 2004).
The game industry is slowly realizing the importance of methodologies in their game
design. It is also becoming more evident that will be sped up with the current
methods. These methods can only become more entrenched as a new generation of
academically educated game designers appear. This chapter will try to answer some
questions about methodologies. It is likely that this chapter may raise more questions
than provide answers. The first step that is being taken here is the need to ask the
right questions. This is at least better than getting badly formulated answers. The first
question we need to ask is; does a game design method bring about better games?
This should be a fundamental question and deserves to be scrutinized. With all
attention of creating a meaningful study around game design and development, we
need stop to ask how deep can this academic study go and does it help to make a
better game? Further in this chapter we will ask the question; where are these
methods coming from? Who is keeping them alive? Already demonstrated are
methods that seem already abandoned or dieing. The next question in this chapter
that needs to be asked; what are the other benefits to having a method in your game
36
design? What method will you use and how? This is a personal question every game
designer will have to ask himself as he approaches his design. The last question we
will ask is; how best can the game designer use these methods? This becomes an
important question as there are doubts as to whether or not methods affect a
designer’s creativity.
5.2 Are we making games better with methodology?
Are we making better games with methodologies? Perhaps there is no real

answer to this, because of the lack of evidence. What is first needed though is to look
into the benefits that methodology can bring to the design of a game. Methodologies
are great for providing tools for the process, rule creation, player interaction and
terminology. Methodologies seem to be primarily an academic approach as many
companies still do not use a clearly defined methods for there designs. What is
difficult to determine, is whether a lack of having methods of design responsible for
poor game design. We have quite a few examples of games that the developers
claim that their methodology was the success factor. Take for example Valve’s cabal
method used during Half-life. Numerous examples can be found in Game Developer
Magazine’s post-mortem articles. Depending on the critic, one could easily point out
that some of these games are prime examples of the best game designs today.
Some games that have been produced with method but the game was a flop, such as
Warrior Kings from Rollings, where not shining examples of great games. As
methodologies become better defined they are sure change the way we look at game
design. When methodologies become better defined and game designers become
comfortable with their ability to use them, perhaps better designed games may just
be the result. Good games come from more than good design of course. Good
games are the work of a team of people all contributing in the development of the
game. Once methods are improved and become better defined, there is the chance
of creating a much more liberal attitude towards experimental games. Methods, it
could be argued could allow game designer to express more creativity, when less
attention is being given to rediscovery of methods. Having an understandable method
takes away the pressures of uncertainty that can arise in ad hoc situation of game
design.
37
5.3 Where are methodologies coming from?
Academics are spending a lot of time on the formalization of game design and
are making methodologies a focal point to understanding game design. Though all
methods are a result of game designers working in the industry, the general appeal of
methodologies are met with less than enthusiastic reception by most game
designers. The common complaint coming from the industry is that these methods be
developing by academics. This is of course not hard to understand when faced with
academic developers that are trying to change the face of gaming while
demonstrating their ignorance of the industry and game design. An example of this
was demonstrated in Maastricht, 2005 Games Symposium. At the moment if you are
seeking a game designer’s position the entry level is at least one or more published
titles and 5 or more years of experience. Why is this? We might conclude that this the
result of only game designers with experience can function as a game designer. This
game designer would more likely than not has developed methods suited to be
become a successful game designer. These methods are not necessarily formalized,
but are a result trial and error. Imagine now an academically trained game designer
armed with the latest information about designing games. We could well imagine that
the entry levels might even change.
We must face the fact that the industry and academics have many differences and
goals. The industry is about survival, plain and simple. The better the games the
more chance of survival. Academics approach is much more about creativity and
knowledge. This of course brings about an interesting symbiotic relationship. In
conclusion we are more likely to see academics improve and become the driving
force of game design methods. Why is this? They have the time to invest developing
these methods, and designers coming from this back ground will be better equipped
to handle these methods in practical way. It is the game design methods that will be
at the heart of these issues as it will become the professional guidelines in which we
communicate with each other.
38
5.4 What are the benefits of game design method?
Why should we use a method if it doesn’t guarantee a great game? After all, we will
always have a group of designers that consider methodologies as pretentious. It can
also be argued that the end success of the game always comes down to the
beginning concept, the development process and team developing the game. So,
what is the hubbub about using a particular method? What we encounter is that a
method can lead us to better design but not guarantee success of the design. It is
also important to mention that methodologies can be dangerous as well if they
become too restrictive. In each methodology there are pros and cons, which must be
observed. If we recognize this and don’t become stuck with dogmatic design, we
have the chance of creating better design methods.
All games have up to this point have been the result of some sort of methodology.
From the lone programmer to iterative design some sort of methodology has been
applied to the design process of the game. We have seen the success of games
created with a wide variety game design methods and we have seen a wide variety
fail. This hit and miss is not enough to throw the idea of a game design methodology
out the window. Used properly it becomes a powerful tool that will allow for more
creativity. Why does this allow for more creativity? Let’s take the example of
languages just for a second. Speaking the same language enables us to
communicate in a much more efficient manor. A method helps enforce a sort of
unified communication of the design. Method should also communicate the design to
everyone involved with the development. Another aspect of method is that it puts the
designer and developers in control of the design.
39
5.5 How to identify a Game Design Method?
Game design methods are not just created out of thin air and all game design
methods share common traits. There must be a structure in which we can recognize
a game design method, because it is very easy to get game design methods
confused or mixed in with production and management. It of course desirable to
avoid this if we are to understand exactly what makes a method. Identifying game
design methods is possible because they share similar traits and goals. What are
these traits and goals? This is the question that will be answered here.
First the method must relate to game design. This means that it must be applicable to
game system interaction, game design process and game mechanics. This means
that if the method starts to talk about production, sales or management it is not a
game design method. While these can easily be carried over it is not the purpose of a
game design method (Kreimeier, 2003). A game design method should also be a tool
for the game designer. A method should be more than just a list of concrete
examples or a definition of a building block. A method involves a procedure, a step-
by-step recipe, at least parts of which can be applied by simple, even automatic
repetition. In particular, it should address specific and concrete issues occurring
during the design of the game (Kreimeier, 2003). These methods should also be
abstract, meaning that a method should be applicable to a wide variety of situations.
Because a method is primarily a tool for the designer this tool must server for a wide
variety of situations (Kreimeier, 2003). Methods for game design should also be
formalized, meaning they should have set structure that determines how information
for the method is organized. This formal structure will allow it to be reusable. Typically
this consists of a template structure (Kreimeier, 2003).
40
5.6 Where does the game designer fit into game design method?
The game designer benefits from a methodology in many ways. Method in

game designs first and for most standardizes the processes of the design. Does this
cut out the creativity in the design? The answer is no. Just because the method is
standardized doesn’t mean that the design is standard. If method is used correctly
the method should never take away creativity. Standardization in methods could be
argued that it even liberates the designer from be entangled in trying to create a new
method every time.
Game design method also defines a particular role during the development of
game. As a game designer, to have knowledge of game design methods is your way
to work efficiently and effectively within a development team. The way the design
method is setup will indicate the game designer’s role in the design process. This will
become a powerful tool when faced with different designing methods that you are are
not used to. After all there are quite a few design methods out there and you can’t
expect people to adopt your design methods. Game Design Methods also make
Game Designers more professional in the designs they present. As better and better
methods of design are created, game designers will be able communicate their
designs more efficiently and in such away that the design also inspires confidence.
41
Game Designer Interview (Playlogic)

Aard Bonewald is currently working as a Game Designer at Playlogic. Before Playlogic he
worked at Davilex and freelance. Bonewald has worked on such published game titles as
Euro Racer, USA Racer, Beach Kings and Cyclone Circus. This is of course is small
compared to the number of titles worked upon but not published. It is important to note here
that most game designers design more games than they see games published. Bonewald
originally studied Industrial Design before he entered into Interaction design finally finishing
with a masters in European Media.
Aard Bonewald: “This is an iterative process in which you; combine, workout and test
ideas into prototypes to see if your theory holds up in Practice.”
Aard Bonewald: “That's a hard one...There is no real proven theory of how to do stuff or
which stuff works. So we mix just about everything, and there are no rules. Test and review
other games, brainstorm about experiences you would like to play. Plus make paper test
prototypes and prototypes with quick functional graphics but full implementation of controls,
rules, animations and sound. “
Aard Bonewald: “Begin with a high level idea... what is cool to do? Then start with the
lowest part the core, the most basic game loop. What does the player do 80% of the time.
And switch between those often and work towards the middle. Until you have a complete
overview of what elements your game will exist out of and how they work together. The
player is always right! Reward a player's time investment and make sure the core is intuitive.
There's a lot of stuff I use that comes from reading, from other designers on the near by and
game designers you hear from at the GDC.”
Aard Bonewald: “I guess more but for now everybody is trying out things. Until we figure
out how and why stuff works we will sometimes get it right and sometimes get it wrong. I
mean look at poetry... the rules are clear and have been for many years. So in theory I can
write poetry that fits all the requirements of very good poetry. But still some people will hate
it and some will love it. Mostly I see game design as an art and no matter what method, you
have to keep tweaking it until its perfect... A painting is never finished. In practice you don't
make a game on your own but with a team, a budget and a time limit. So you have to work
on all those factors to make sure you get it done so the game is released at the right point in
time.”
42
6 Conclusion
In this last chapter we will examine game design methods from the point of view of a
student of game design and as well that of a professional game designer. An
argument will be presented here concerning methods. The intention is not only to
induce the reader that it is foolish not to validate game design methods but to actively
search out better methods. We are entering an era, where for the first time in the
gaming world, game designers are be educated in schools. The experience of being
one these students has resulted in certain amount of insight and these opinions have
been reinforced with experience of working in the industry. The research done for this
document has only further supported my position.
The future of game design methodologies is in the hand of academics that are
themselves accomplished and knowledgeable game designers. Even thought the
methods discuss in this document is the result of experienced designers from the
industry. The conclusion is that while these designers may have been able to spread
a certain amount of uniformity in game design process, we still are looking at an
industry where designers do not communicate in one professional language.
Individual companies have created their own languages and while only a few brave
souls try to go deeper into understanding their profession. This is still not enough to
create a strong unity. It is very secondary to the industry to keep up the research into
design methods. It will be the responsibility then of schools to teach their student
properly the design methods that they will give them their tools for future game
designing. It will then be the responsibility of these students to then become the
academics that are suggesting new methods.
This isn’t to say that the industry isn’t at all concerned for the academic approach but
it isn’t high on the priority list. Academics have managed to earn themselves a bit of a
poor reputation. This can attributed to many reasons, but the new academics coming
from schools similar to the HKU will most likely use methods to define their game
design and will be schools like the HKU that benefit the most from the new standard
of game academics. Learning about methods will be the corner stone of any student
game designers approach to game design. When we look deeper into this we realize
that students will have a better grasp on game design than some of the most
experienced game designer that still rely on trial an error. Who should really be
concerned about game design methods? The answer should be students. Perhaps it
is to go too far but in theory, when game designers have a better grasp on their tools,
support for creating innovated and experimental games will become more common,
because these future designers will exude confidence and demonstrate through their
knowledge the ability to design the next generation games.
Methods provide game designers with tools. The ability to document ant your ideas is
the epitome of a designer’s expression, even if the documentation and the completed
design are nothing alike. What ever the process method, it is wise to use
documentation as a guideline and reference to one’s thoughts. It is essential that the
game design documentation be efficient and to the point. A game designer should be
primarily concerned with information. That means that the designer should have the
ability to expound upon the concept and its design to his development team,
43
producers or other designers. Game design is an iterative process, always requiring

tweaking and balancing. Iteration at its best can also determine the player’s ability to
play the game and enjoy it. As the designer we must look at these as tools in the
strictest sense. How much or how little iteration, the choice should be less a question
of style as much as a realization of knowing what method fits the game’s design. It is
inevitable that many of the games a designer will work upon in his career will more
likely than not be close adaptations of a previous game. In making such games how
far should one be concerned with an iterative process? That is of course for each and
every designer to decide. What we must consider is how efficient we want to be when
creating the design. It would make more sense to use the iterative process when
dealing with experimental games. While a less iterative process for systems we
already know that work and depend on more FADTs and patterns. This is a great
example of deciding how to use these methods as tools. We must use common
sense and no certain amount of ingenuity to use the methods to their best effects.
As aspiring game designers, we should know that we have methods available to us in

which we can use to great effect in our designs. Saying this, we must look at all
methods as a collection of tools, being used when it is best for the game’s design.
Methods should not to be separated from each other; instead these methods should
be grouped in under what should be considered game design theory. It is also
important that we don’t stop here with the present methods, but drive to discover
better ones or improve the ones we have. As student academics, soon to be
professional game designers we are faced with trailblazing a path in game design
and development. With the right education and support we as game designer will be
stepping into a new era, where we could finally consolidate and define game design
as field of study.
44
Colophone
Written and Edited: Micah M Hrehovcsik, GDD-3
Thesis Guidance: Hanne Marckmann
45
Bibliography
A. Literature
a. Books
- Andrew, R. & Morris, R., Game design Architecture and Design, New Riders,
2004
- Saltzman, M., Game design: Secret of the Sages, Brady, R., 1999
- Rouse III, R., Game design: Theory and Pratice, Worldware, 2001
- Koster, R., A Theory of Fun for Game design, Paraglyph, 2005
- Crawford, C., Chris Crawford: On Game design, New Riders, 2003
- Fullerton, T., Swain, C., & Hoffman, S., Game design: Workshop, CMP, 2004
- Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E., Rules of Play: Game design Fundamentals, MIT,
2004
- Barfield, L., Design for New Media, Pearson Education, 2004
- Martin, J., Strategic Information Planning Methodologies, Prentice-Hall, 1989
- Roger, Callois, Play, Man and Games, University of Illinois Press, 2001
b. Magazines
- Game Developer
- The edge
46
B. Internet (June 2005)

- www.gamsutra.com
a. Tim Ryan, Documentation Milestones and the Development Schedule,
1999
b. Ken Birdwell, The Cabal: Valve’s Design Process for creating Half-Life,
1999
c. Doug Church, Formal Abstract Design Tools, 1999
d. Bernd Kreimeier, Game Design Methods: A 2003 Survey, 2003
e. Craig A. Lindley, Game Taxonomies: A High Level Framework for
Game, 2003
- www.lostgarden.com
a. Danc, Design Testing: The use of addiction metrics to force rapid
evolution of innovative game designs, 2004
- www.theinspircy.com
- www.ludism.org
a. Ron Hale-Evans, Formal Abstract Design Tools, 2004
- www.wikipedia.com
- www.gamedev.net
a. Francois Dominic Laramee, The Game Design Process, 1999
b. Daniel Cook, Evolutionary Design: A practical process for creating great
game designs, 2002
- www.gamedesignpatterns.org
a. Jussi Holopainen and Staffan Björk, Game Design Patterns, 2005
- www.ihfsoft.com
- www.digra.org
- http://www.erasmatazz.com
C. Interviews and Confrences

- Harm van Dinter, Game Designer: Woedend, email correspondence, 2005
- Aard Bonewald, Game Designer: Playlogic, email correspondence, 2005
- Brian Roberts, Game Designer: Guerilla, Amsterdam, 2005
- Chris Crawford, Game Designer, Games Symposium, Maastricht, 2005
47

Hrehovcsik M 2005 - Current Game Design Methodologies - Finding A New Approach

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Hrehovcsik M 2005 - Current Game Design Methodologies - Finding A New Approach

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Current Game Design Methodologies:

Finding a New Approach

2.1 THESIS INTRODUCTION 3

GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEWS (INTRODUCTION) 12

GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEW (GUERRILLA) 13

4 GAME DESIGN METHODS 14

5 QUESTIONS CONCERNING GAME DESIGN METHODS 36

GAME DESIGNER INTERVIEW (PLAYLOGIC) 42

In 2002 , as circumstances would have it I came back to the Netherlands after

2.2 Game Designer and Game Design

2.3 Methodology in Game design

2.4 Using Game Design Methodology

To understand game design methodologies we first need to understand what game

3.2 Game Play

3.3 The Player

“Players may compete individually, or in aggregates known as teams which normally

3.4 Game Rules

3.5 Game Design Theory

3.6 The Game Designer

3.7 Game Design Conclusion

Game Designer Interviews (Introduction)

Game Designer Interview (Guerrilla)

MH: What is your definition of a game design process or method?

MH: What is your ideal game design process?

MH: What is an important element in your game design process?

MH: Is there a future for game design methods?

4 Game Design Methods

4.2 Early Game Design Methods

4.2.1 Cowboy Game Design

To understand the cowboy methodology we need to understand the development

- Usually a one man team.

- Easy Management of the Narrative

4.3 Game Design Process Methods

4.3.1 Design Bible Method

- Concept Document or Design Treatment

The Concept Document or Design Treatment is a document that is used to describe

- The Wafer-Thin: Not enough information.

4.3.2 Iterative Design

- Define the fundamental rules of your concept

- Return to step one

4.3.3 Cabal Game Design Process

- The game design is created collaboratively

4.4 Game Design Guideline Methods

4.4.1 Discourse by Anecdote

Discourse by anecdote is a way of passing on game design experience by the way of

4.4.2 400 Rules

1. A concise, imperative statement of the rule, both as a sentence and paragraph

1. Provide Clear Short-Term Goals

19. Make the Effects of the AI Visible to the Player

4.4.3 FADT (Formal Abstract Design Tools)

! Formal: Objective; we should be able to say that the concept definitely is or is

- Formal Abstract Design Tool

- INTENTION: Making a plan of one's own creation in response to the current

4.4.4 Pattern Method

- Name: "Naming a pattern immediately increases our design vocabulary. It lets

- Perceived Chance to Succeed

4.4.5 Lexicon Approach

4.4.6 Game Design Taxonomy

Game Designer Interview (Woedend)

Harm van Dinter: Dit is de manier om tot je spelontwerp te komen.

In de stappen 3 en 4 worden de grootste design beslissignen genomen. Hier worden

In stap 5 wordt de inhoudt verder uitgewerkt en gedetailleerd.

In de stappen 6 t/m 8 wordt er in het ontwerp eigenlijk alleen nog "getweakt".