The Game Development Process

The Game Development
Process
Game Design
Outline
The Creative Process

Core Design
Postmortems
Nurturing the Creative Process
Creativity is not intellectual anarchy

Thoughts are associative generate new ideas by
combining others (picture of lattice of association)
Trick is to notice patterns in association
Say, similarity between post office delivery and
network traffic routing
Facilitate creative process
Stuff head with concepts and associations
Cant notice association between Post Office and
Network Routing if dont know anything about either
How? Read (All great game designers?)
Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford and Ch 2.2, The Game Development Process
Nurturing the Creative Process Read
Make reading a lifelong process

Broaden your reading
Wonder as you read (Why is the sky blue? Why do

some coins have serrations on their edges?)
More than SciFi and Fantasy books

History, Religion, Politics, Culture
Game Design books
Tightens up Web of associations
Find answers to wonders
Help build overall creative foundation
Once you find why sky is blue, will tell you why sunset is
red (tightens associations further)

Play Games
More than computer games board games
Columbia Games, Avalon Hill, RPGs

Example: LOTR Confrontation, Reiner Knizia
Even computer games, broaden
Pick titles you would not otherwise play

Like FPS games? Fine. But try different genres
Become a student of games. Learn from
them.
Bargain bin, even, maybe not great games but
maybe great ideas

Sources of Inspiration
Perhaps games not as broad as film
Draw upon wide range of sources for inspiration
Originality in gameplay, story, setting, interface
Stephen King originality when put familiar together

in unexpected ways
Shoot em ups like Alien

RPGs like D&D
Safe: Its like Medal of Honor but in Desert Storm
how creative is that?
Opera, Movies with subtitles, Random lectures, scuba
diving anything to remove stale thinking
Freshness to one, great game
Freshness to all, new genre!
Ex: vampire in pirate setting (turns to shark)
Based on Ch 1, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris
Nurturing the Creative Process Brainstorm
Brainstorming has been much studied, and
there have been found some common

elements
Intense emotional involvement
Care about problem
Creator struggles, mightily, but fails
Quiescent period, creator is distracted
Finally, brainstorm itself and solution leaps
to forefront
It may even seem obvious at that time
Having the Idea
How many industries can claim to deal in

daydreams?
Dreams are where every game begins
With an idea, dont implement or tie down to

technology
Genius is 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration
Edison
Enjoy the 1% because everything else is hard work
Think of many raw ideas to throw into game
May come up with hybrid

Look at what can contribute to others so get
emergent game
Based on Ch 1, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Growing the Idea
Most ideas shouldnt grow further
Just because it is a creative idea, does not

mean it is a good one
Be aggressive at this point in your own mind

in ripping into your own idea
Others soon will, so you should first
Then, when pushing the idea (to, say, a
publisher) through to a concept, make sure

can protect, perhaps with partner
politically skilled
Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford
The Creative Process The

Beginning
Once you have an idea
Is it really good?
Worth spending time and money on?
Even if rehash should bring improvement
to original and new challenges
Discuss with someone that can appreciate
the idea
Based on pages 233+, Gameplay and Design, by Kevin Oxland
The Creative Process Define the

Product
Consider target audience

Gather feedback from colleagues
Think about core objectives
List the challenges
Determine how player will interface

Define unique features, essential to gameplay
Consider theme (not graphical theme)

Solidify in two- to three-page document
Will help determine genre
Has features been done before? If not, is there a

reason why not?
The Creative Process Involving

Others
Never design by committee
Meet with team with one-pager

Keep early meetings focused on design and not on
technical
Write all ideas down, may come in handy later
Incorporate changes into 2-3 page document
Move on to Concept Document
The only useful document ever designed by a

committee is the constitution
But blend of like-minded people can be very
effective
Outline
The Creative Process

Core Design
Postmortems
(next)
Core Design
Topics
What is a Game
Gameplay
Interactivity
Game Balance
Look and Feel
Based on Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris
What is a Game? (1 of 3)
Movie? (ask: why not?)
Toy? (has interaction ask: why not?)
Puzzle? (has goal + interaction ask: why not?)
no interaction, outcome fixed
no goal, but still fun (players can develop own goals)

strategy and outcome is the same each time
A computer game is a software program in which one or more players make decisions
through the control of game objects and resources, in pursuit of a goal.
Definitions (from Ch 2.2):

Play - Interactions to elicit emotions
Game - Object that provides rule-bound play
Frame - The border of a games context
Inside the frame is in the game

Outside the frame is real life
Aesthetics - Emotional responses during play

General enough to cover everything
Chapter 2.2, Introduction to Game Development
What is a Game (2 of 3)
A Computer Game is a Software Program

Not a board game or sports
Consider: chess vs. soccer vs. Warcraft
Ask: What do you lose?
What do you gain?
Lose: 1) physical pieces, 2) social interaction

Gain: 1) real-time, 2) more immersive, 3) more complexity
A Computer Game involves Players
No, Duh. But stress because think about audience.

The game is not for you but for them.
Dont just think about your story or the graphics or the
interface, but consider the players.
Ex: complicated flight simulator (say, you are a flying
geek) but audience is beginner
Based on Tutorial: What is a Good Game?, by Mark Overmars
What is a Game (3 of 3)
Playing a Game is About Making Decisions
Playing a Game is About Control
A Game Needs a Goal
Ex: what weapon to use, what resource to build

Can be frustrating if decision does not matter
Want good gameplay (next major topic)
Player wants to impact outcome
Uncontrolled sequences can still happen, but should
be sparing and make logical
Ex: Riven uses train system between worlds
Ex: Defeat Ganandorf in Zelda

Long games may have sub-goals
Ex: recover Triforce first, then Sword of Power
Without game goals, a player develops his/her own
(a toy)
Based on Tutorial: What is a Good Game?, by Mark Overmars
What a Game is Not (1 of 2)
A bunch of cool features
A lot of fancy graphics
Necessary, but not sufficient

May even detract, if not careful, by concentrating on features
not game
Games need graphics just as hit movie needs special effect
but neither will save weak idea
Again, may detract
Game must work without fancy graphics
Suggestion: should be fun with simple objects
When a designer is asked how his game is going to make a difference, I hope he
talks about gameplay, fun and creativity as opposed to an answer that simply
focuses on how good it looks Sid Meier (Civilizations, Railroad Tycoon, Pirates)
Based on Chapter 2, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris
What a Game is Not (2 of 2)
A series of puzzles
An intriguing story
All games have them

But not gameplay in themselves
Puzzles are specific, game systems spawn more
generic problems
Good story encourages immersion
But will mean nothing without gameplay
Example: Baldurs Gate, linear story. Going wrong
way gets you killed. But not interactive.
Interaction in world all leads to same end.
Games are Not Everything
Most important is it fun, compelling, engaging?
Computers are good at interactivity
Examples:
And these come from a superset of games
Allow for interactive fun

Interactive Media and Game Development
SimCity - very compelling, but mostly no goals.
More of toy than a game, but still fun.
Grim Fandango - good visuals, story, etc. But need
to do puzzles to proceed. Could have skipped to
just watch story. Would still have been fun without
the gameplay.
Core Design
Topics
What is a Game
Gameplay
Game Balance
Look and Feel
Approaching Game Design
Used to be thought that could not teach game

design more of an art
But you can teach art! (AR1000 + )
Even to art, there are technical disciplines such as

in music, film, poetry
So, consider computer game designs as are an art
form
Game design practices can be taught
Game Theory
Some designers approach Game Theory thinking it

will help design games
Rather, it is a theory about games are played
Game theory is
Branch of economics
Systems governed by rules
Mathematically analyzed to determine payoffs of
various end points.
Game theory assumes rational players

Abstract model players not real people
Always try to maximize their potential utility

Solve problems using pure logic
Always fully aware of the state of the game
Gameplay
Gameplay
Includes
Note, gameplay is not everything
No one expects gameplay in movies or plays
Collective strategies to reach end points of game theory

Specific to game activities
What the player does
Utility - A measure of desire associated with an outcome
Payoffs - The utility value for a given outcome
Preference - The bias of players towards utility
Choice of car in GTA is not always about payoff, but about what is fun
Software doesnt have to have gameplay to be entertaining consider
SimCity
Who says: Hey, where is the gameplay in Hamlet?
Rule 1: It should be fun (entertainment)
Rule 2: It should be interactive (make use of computer, else perhaps
use film)
Rule 3: It can have gameplay (but that is choice)
Gameplay Example (1 of 2)
Adventure game: knight, dwarf, priest, thief

During combat, knight and dwarf in front, thief fires
arrows
Priest casts spells (assume all cost the same)
Which spell should Priest cast?
E-bolts (do damage equal to sword)

Band-aids (heal equal to sword)
Ask: against single opponent (they are equal)

Ask: against opponent with 6 arms (bolts)
Ask: against many opponents with weak attacks (bandaids)
Can always decide which is better
Not so interesting
Gameplay Example (2 of 2)
Now, suppose
Band-aids still affect single target but ebolts have an area affect
E-bolts do less damage, but armor doesnt
make a difference
Now, which spell should Priest cast?
Answer isnt as easy. Interesting choices.

Good gameplay.
A game is a series of interesting choices.
- Sid Meier (pirates, civilization)
Implementing Gameplay (1 of 4)
Choice
A question asked of the player
Outcome
The end result of a given choice
Possibility space
Represents the set of possible events

A landscape of choice and outcome
Choices must be non-trivial, with upside and downside
Note, this is only regarding game theory
Gameplay value when upside and downside and payoff

depends upon other factors
If only upside, AI should take care of it

If only downside, no-one will ever use it
Ex: Could have ray gun that plays music. Cool, but
soon gimme the BFG
Ex: Nintendos Smash Bros has Taunt ask: what
for?
Ask: other examples from popular games?
Ex: Rohan horsemen, but what if other player recruits

pikemen?
Ex: Bazooka, but what if other player gets out of tank?
Well-designed choice
Qualities of Choice (from book, Ch 2.2)
Often desirable and undesirable effects

Should relate to player goals
Hollow lacking consequence

Obvious leaves no choice to be made
Uninformed arbitrary decision
Weighted good and bad in every choice
Dramatic strongly connects to feelings
Immediate effects are immediate
Long-term effects over extended period
Orthogonal choices distinct from each other
Should be series of interesting choices
Ex:
Use of health potion now may depend upon whether

have net for capturing more fairies
Having net may depend upon whether needed space for
more arrows for bow
Needing arrows may depend upon whether killed all flying
zombie bats yet
Hence, well designed game should require strategy

Game must display complexity
But doesnt mean it must be complex!
Dont make too many rules. Less if more.

Real world example: termites place one piece of mud.
Results in hive, with cooling vents, etc.
Emergence from interaction of rules
Ex: Priests convert, but not if already in combat

(Me: see what game)
Ask: examples from popular games?
The Dominant Strategy Problem
Articles with 10 killer tactics or ultimate

weapon
Ask: what are these doing?
Taking advantage of flaws in the game design!
Should never have a option not worth using
Should never have an option that is so good, it is

never worth doing anything else
Dominated strategy
Dominant strategy
Near Dominance
Worth looking for near dominance, too
Ex: stun gun only useful against raptors, so only

useful on raptor level (near dominated)
Near-dominated useful only very narrow

circumstance
Near-dominant used most of the time
Do I want it used more often?

How much effort on this feature?
Should I put in lots of special effects?
Ex: flurry of blows most useful attack (near

dominant) by Monk
Should we spend extra time for effects?
Avoid Trivial Choices (1 of 2)
Horsemen Archers Pikemen
Horsemen Archers Pikemen Horsemen

(picture)
Transitive, not so interesting
Ask: what game does this look like? (rock-paperscissors)

Intransitive, more interesting
Ex: from LOTR Battle for Middle Earth
Horsemen fast, get to archers quickly with lances

Pikemen spears hurt horsemen bad
Pikemen slow, so archers wail on them from afar
(Will look at game balance in depth, next topic)

Avoid Trivial Choices (2 of 2)
A beats B, B beats C, C beats A (could hardwire)
Ask: Which is better?
But could also have how much better

1) Single horseman can beat any number of archers:
Horseman Archers ()
2) Single horseman barely beat an archer:
Horseman Archers (1.1)
Trick question! Both are bad
Case 1) equal number of each, all others lose

Case 2) doesnt matter which you choose
Dont want to hardwire. Sometimes A way better

than B, sometimes a bit better, sometimes worse
The answer should depend upon the game situation,

weather, terrain, time also what opponent is doing
Environment + Rules = Gameplay
Battle of Hastings, 1066 A.D.

King Harold tired, mostly infantry
Duke William more archers, cavalry
Not quite Harold on hill (arrows less effective) and

defensive mode
http://www.battle1066.com/
Archers beat slower infantry game over
Archers tire game over
Not quite William also smart, cavalry approach, but

retreat. Infantry break ranks since they are
frustrated, charge
Arrows now shred Infantry Harold loses, game over
Point: ways to change balance between different

troop types. A good commander isnt the one with the best
army; he is the one who knows how to use it best
Ensuring Interesting Choices (1 of 3)
Ex: Elite (early 80s, ask: who played?)
Accumulate wealth by trading

When 1000 credits, trade lazer for better
lazer and have 400 left over for trading.
No brainer. Always a win.
What if could buy lazer with 600? Then no
credits left over. Decision is tougher.
Point: keep difficult choices in hands of
player
Ask: other examples?
Kinds of choices in gameplay can involve options:
First and Second most interesting

Third valid, but really only chrome
Fourth should be handled by AI
Fifth should seriously consider removing
1) Should sometimes be taken, sometimes not

2) Timing is critical and depends upon context
(upgrade armor or build more troops)
3) Makes little difference whether taken or not
4) Always worth taking (target nearest)
5) Never worth taking (remove armor, pay guy for
tapestry in Vici)
Interesting choices require good judgment

on the part of the player
Correct choice must vary with circumstances
Aim as designer, ensure circumstances dont
stagnate and have only one right way to win

No method for finding best choices
Thats where creativity comes in (art)
Still, some tips
Toolbox of Interesting Choices
Strategic versus Tactical

Supporting Investments
Versatility
Compensating Factors
Impermanence
Shadow Costs
Strategic versus Tactical (1 of 3)
Strategic choices affect course of game

over medium or long term
Tactical choices apply right now
Ex: build archers or swordsmen (strategic)

Ex: send archers or swordsmen to defend
against invading force (tactical)
Strategic choices have effect on tactical

choices later
Ex: if dont build archers, cant use

tactically later
Ex: StarCraft
Strategic choice: 1) upgrade range of

marines, 2) upgrade damage, or 3) research
faster fire
Which to choose?
If armored foes, Protoss Zealot, more
damage
If fast foes, Zerglings, maybe faster fire
Other factors: number of marines, terrain,

on offense or defense
Ex: Warzone 2100 (ask: who played?)
Build factories to spawn war machines

If build in level, then spawn quickly but
factory only used for that level
If build at base, spawn slowly (have to ship to
front lines) but factory can be used in
subsequent levels
Lesson: Good gameplay should have different

choices leading to different kinds of payoff
Reduces the risk of trivial choices
Increase scope for good judgment
Often game has primary goal (ex: beat enemy) but

secondary goals (ex: build farms for resources)
Some expenditures directly impact primary goal (ex: hire
soldier), while others indirect (ex: build farm) called
supporting investments
Primary goals are one-removed
Supporting goals are two-removed
Ex: improve weapons, build extra barracks
Ex: build smithy can then improve weapons

Ex: research construction lets you build smithy and build
barracks (two and three removed)
Most interesting since strategic
Payoff will depend upon what opponents do
Versatility (1 of 2)
Rule of thumb is to ask what is best and worst

about choices:
1) This move does most damage, but slowest
2) This move is fastest, but makes defenseless
3) This move best defense, but little damage
4) This neither best nor worst, but most versatile
Most should be best in some way

Versatile good for
beginners
flexibility (against unpredictable or expert
opponent)
Versatility (2 of 2)
Ex: beam can mine asteroids and shoot

enemies
Versatility makes it good choice
Speed is common way for versatility

Dont make fast units best
If a versatile unit is also cheapest and
most powerful no interesting choice

(See Compensating Factors, next)
Consider strategy game where all units impeded by some

terrain
Ships cant go on land, tanks cant cross water, camel riders

only in dessert
Assume flying unit that can go anywhere (Ask: how to

balance?)
1) Make slow
2) Make weak, easily destroyed
3) Make low surveillance range (unrealistic)
4) Make expensive
Note, last choice common but uninteresting since doesnt

change tactical use
Choice should be clear to player. Dont make a gamble
before they know.
Ex: pick troops (cold weather) then find in jungle
Impermanence (1 of 2)
Some permanent (ex: you get to treasure first),

others not (ex: I got storage near mine, but you
can grab it off me)
Really, another kind of compensating factor
Can be used for interesting choices
Advantage (or disadvantages) can be impermanent

in number of ways:
I.e. impermanence can compensate for something

being really good
Ex: choice of medium armor for rest of game or
invulnerable for 30 seconds?
Impermanence (2 of 2)
(Examples mostly from Magic the Gathering

Battlegrounds)
Can be destroyed (enchantments, ex: gratuitous

violence makes units tough, but can be destroyed)
Can be stolen or converted (ex: threaten steals or
converts enemy for short time)
Can be applied to something you dont always have
(ex: goblin king gives bonus to goblins, but must have
goblins)
Certain number of uses (ex: three grenades, but
grenade spamming)
Last for some time (wears off, ex: Mario
invulnerable star)
Common in games, but deserves special attention
Shadow Costs (1 of 2)
In a game, continually presented with costs

and trade-offs. But not all direct.
Ex: soldiers for gold, but need armory first

for weapons and barracks for soldiers
Called shadow costs for supporting
investments
Can make flow chart mapping shadow costs
Shadow Costs (2 of 2)
Ex: Age of Mythology has wood and food. Food is

inexhaustible, wood is finite
Charioteer
Costs 60 wood, 40 food and 40 seconds to spawn

Shadow costs vary over game
Early on, food and wood expensive, spawn doesnt

matter
Mid-game, much food and wood, spawn makes it
harder to pump out new units
End-game, no wood, spawn is priceless
Use variability to add subtlety to game. Vary

environment and vary shadow costs (ex: more trees
to vary cost of wood)
Challenge for level designer
Expert players will appreciate
Review: Use Tools from Toolbox of

Interesting Choices
Strategic versus Tactical

Versatility
Impermanence
Shadow Costs
Groupwork:
Use 1-2 in a game about graduating from college.
Discuss.
Synergies (1 of 2)
Synergies are interaction between different elements
of players strategies (note, terms may be different than ch 2.2)
Positive Feedback
Economies of Scale
the more of one type,
the better (ex: wizards
draw strength from
each other)
Economies of Scope
the more of a set, the
better, or advantage of
combined arms (ex:
trident and net,
infantry and tanks)
Negative Feedback
Diseconomies of scale
first is most useful,
others have less
benefit (ex: diminishing
returns from more
peasants entering a
mine since get in each
others way)
Diseconomies of scope
(ex: mixed troops go
only as fast as slowest)
Synergies (2 of 2)
Ideally, all go together at once, but can emphasize
Game of negative feedback needs other ways to

keep interesting
Ex: Chess is a game of positive feedback

Small advantage early on, exploited to crushing
advantage
Ex: trench combat makes a catch-up factor, or as

get far from base, supply long grows, game lasts a
long time
Ex: Super NES NBA Jam catch up setting as an
equalizer
Be aware of each
Final Word on Gameplay
Need to make sure choices interact
Ex: no fun winning just because outoptimize guy on resource production

Ex: no fun if winning just because know
right thing to do else lose no game, just
forgone conclusion
Want choices to interact with choices of

opponent, want it to depend
Interactivity versus Gameplay
Gameplay is important because it allows you to take the

experience someplace
Ex: Kick the soccer ball around, practice headers, bicycle
kicks, etc. (interactivity)
Play a game of soccer on the pitch (interactivity +
gameplay)
Can you have gameplay without interactivity? Maybe. But
even so, gameplay without interactivity could be fun (ietelevision), but would start wondering if time is better
spent doing something else
Interactivity is more important that gameplay
Interactivity without gameplay can be fun
Ex: Black and White, Sims
Interactivity is the heart and soul of entertainment software
Kinds of Interactivity (1 of 2)
Can interact in many ways game designers

sometimes restrict themselves to facts
Ex: if you hit w/BFG, do 50 points damage
Think broadly. Player could potentially:
1) Directly control characters (Ex: move Laura Croft)

2) Affect world (Ex: make Stronghold guys insane)
3) Influence characters actions at one remove (Ex: give
weapons, like Zeus to a hero)
4) Influence at two removes (Ex: provide inspiration, like
a Muse)
5) Decide who to follow, rather than what to follow (Ex:
observer mode)
6) Select what parts are interesting and give more time
to that (Ex: like a child with a bedtime story, Saahil
likes the hero build up and powers most)
Kinds of Interactivity (2 of 2)
(Ask: others?)
In the above list, how many are done?
But many not done:
1 most everything, 2 for changing difficulty

Why cant you say to computer opponent:
Hey, lets build up a big army before we fight or

Dont attack me since Im having fun building
Or, why cant you switch sides in a battle?
Avoid making mutant versions of films, novels or

even board games
Use imagination for interactivity
Concentrate on Why not just What
Doesnt have to be about what happens
Drama unfolds because of understanding of

characters
Ex: ER. Noah Wylie is avatar. With a sick patient does

he follow rules, give experimental drug, play basketball?
But not only way to be interactive. Instead, follow Noah,
switch to patient, go to other Dr., back to Noah (learn
about characters, the Why)
True in non-interactive drama, so true in games, too
Ex: D&D dungeon, series of rooms w/monsters. Much

richer if why behind scenes. Why were dwarves
there? Why did they die? How orcs break in?
Goal of entertainment is to make audience care
Use interactivity as a way to powerful technique to help

this
Core Design
Brief, since overlaps material in
IMGD 1000. Critical Studies of Interactive

Media and Games
Topics
What is a Game
Gameplay
Game Balance
Look and Feel
Based on Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris
(Overmars + Ch2)
(Ch 3)
(Ch 5)
(Ch 6)
Game Balance - Introduction
Beauty in balanced games
Game without balance often unsatisfying and

wasted effort (parts not in balance not used, so
wasted effort)
Broadly, game balance includes:
Like Rolls Royce or Ball Machine in Airport
Player-Player advantage only in skill (can be luck,

but should be equal to both)
Player-Gameplay learning curve matched by reward
Gameplay-Gameplay Composite longbow does twice
damage, should cost twice $
Mini-Outline

Player-Player
Player-Gameplay
Gameplay-Gameplay
(next)
Player/Player Balance (1 of 2)
Ex: Virtua Fighter (ask: who has played?)

Say, Sarah Bryant beats Lion every time?
Does that mean unbalanced?
No, look more closely
Suppose friend said could beat everyone as Sarah

Bryant all the time. Would say prove it
Would only be a problem if beginner as Sarah always
beat expert as Lion
And if could choose characters? Sarah versus
Sarah?
Player/Player Balance (2 of 2)
Allow to arrange victory by skill and judgment

Avoid results mostly as stroke of luck
Simplest way is to have symmetry
Right from the start or magnified as game

progresses (ex: start close to gold mine provides
escalating advantage)
Same weapons, maneuvers, hit points (sports do
this)
(But note, not always the most interesting. Want
different moves on fighters, say. More later.)
Symmetry - Example
Two heroes square off for duel, poised in kung fu

stance
Hours pass. Days pass.
Breeze comes by, spec of dust in ones eye
Blinks, frowns then bows
Know result without fight tiny asymmetry enough
to decide outcome
If breeze or dust decided game, is that ok?
Dont want to decide by factors out of control
No youd want your money back!

Keep symmetric
Symmetry
Symmetry is fine in abstract games (ex:
chess, even basketball)

In realistic games, would be problem (ex:
U.S. versus Iraq, game symmetry would be
bothersome since not realistic)
While easy, kind of an insult
Ex: LOTR BfME Wargs same as horses
but Wargs can bite in book/movie!
Better is functional symmetry that is not

obvious
Symmetry in Level Design
Can avoid obvious symmetry
Ex: each player has impassible region on flank

(water or mountain range)
Knights and soldiers cant cross

Later on, advanced units can cross
Choice of unit depends upon barrier
Mountaineers to storm, ships to cross sea

Or bluff, and then go up middle
Players can choose asymmetric start location
Should not be deciding factor (Ex: you choose

downwind port, so you lose)
Avoiding making start location critical decision
Ex: potential mines in many spots, so not critical
Symmetry in Game Design (1 of 2)
Make all choices for players functionally
the same
Ex: Warcraft 2 humans have griffons and
orcs have dragons; both flying toughies.
But even slight differences make
interesting
Ex: Warcraft 2 orc players runes explode,
making use in mountain passes good
Just broken asymmetry easier to manage

than total asymmetry (can compensate)
Symmetry in Game Design (2 of 2)
Making choices for players different, yet balanced

is tougher
Ex: Starcraft: Protoss, Zergs, Terrans all very
different (Same with Command and Conquer
Generals)
Imagine the hours of playtesting!
Recommend only for deep pockets
Starcraft is often a benchmark against which to
judge other RTS game balance
Also, if re-creating historical simulation, tradeoff

between fairness and authenticity
Ex: Conquistadors vs. Aztecs Aztecs are doomed,
but may be no fun. Certainly not symmetric
Mini-Outline

Player-Player
Player-Gameplay
Gameplay-Gameplay
(next)
Player/Gameplay Balance
Introduction (1 of 2)
Means remembering that the business is
about interactivity think about players

relationship to the game
Ex: If had to tune the T.V. every time
channel surf, would not do it much
Likewise, should not struggle for small
reward
Ex: Baldurs Gate (ask: whos played?)
Attributes are 3-18 (ask: why?), can re-roll

if dont like. So, re-roll until all 18s. Ugh.
Test of endurance!
Player/Gameplay Balance
Introduction (2 of 2)
Player/Gameplay balance entails balancing

challenges against players improvement curve
Many RPGs have monsters get tougher with level
Ex: Diablo 2 does this

But boring if that is all since will feel the same
Want widening options, too
Ex: character gets more abilities
Three rules
1) Reward the player

2) Let the machine do the work
3) Make a game that you play with, not against
Reward the Player
Player will have to learn. Will make mistakes

(discouraging). Want to offset with reward when
do something right
Ex: Virtua Fighter, takes longer to learn
complicated moves
Sarahs backflip. Reward comes from seeing flip
(eye candy) and punch in kidneys (payoff)
Best when expand game options
In general, better to reward player for something

right than punish for something wrong
Ex: Now with backflip, I can see new use for

reverse punch
Punishment makes players not want to play
Let the Machine do the Work
Interface should show player the world and let him/her

manipulate
Computer is tool to take care of wide-range of tedious tasks
If tasks are not fun, dont make player do them
There is a blur of boundary between chore and game feature
RPG could provide graph so player can manually draw map
as explore but is that fun?
Ex: In D&D, can tell D.M. we go back to the dungeon
entrance. Easy, fun. What if a game makes player walk
back over map that has been seen? Boring, no fun.
Ex: Myst provided lightning bolt move to avoid tedium
(Ask: other examples?)
Also, if game option is no-brainer, consider AI taking care of
it
Make a Game that you Play With,

Not Against
Consider great story, graphics, immersion but

only progress by trial and error is this fun?
Ex: crossbowman guards exit
1.
Run up and attack. Hes too fast. Back to save

point (more on save points next).
2. Drink potion. Sneak up. He shoots you. Back to
save.
3. Drop bottle as distraction. He comes looking.
Shoots you. Back to save.
4. Drink potion. Drop bottle. He walks by you. You
escape!
Lazy design!
Should succeed by skill and judgment, not trial

and error
Specific Example The Save Game Problem (1 of 2)
Designer talking about RPG
Designer: Ive got a great trap! platform goes

down to room. Player thinks treasure but really
flame throwers. Player is toast!
Tester: What if player jumps off?
D: Thinks its a loophole Ok, teleport in then
toast
T: What is the solution?
D: There isnt one. (surprised) Its a killer trap.
It will be fun.
T: So, theres no clue for player? Charred remains
on platform or something?
D: No. Thats what the Save feature is for.
Specific Example The Save Game Problem (1 of 2)
Should be used only so players can go back to their

Real Lives in between games
Or maybe to allow player to fully see folly of actions,

for exploratory and dabbling
Dont design game around need to save
Beginner player should be able to reason and come

up with answer
Has become norm for many games, but too bad

Ex: murderous level can only get by trying all combat
options
Challenges get tougher (more sophisticated
reasoning) as player and game progress, so appeals to
more advanced player
But not trial and error
Mini-Outline

Player-Player
Player-Gameplay
Gameplay-Gameplay
(next)
Gameplay/Gameplay Balance
Challenges when balancing aspects of gameplay?
Sounds like catch-22? Can use simple concepts to

make first guess
Want variety of interesting choices, rather than

single, dominant choice
Best choices depend upon choices of other players
(or on AI)
Not easy to see how frequently different choices
will be worth making, but need to know to balance
game
Then lots of play testing to fine tune!
Component Balance
Two levels to balancing: component and attribute

Component balance deals with relative values (ex: cost and
strength)
Attribute involves interaction of abilities (ex: speed
versus hit points)
Talk about component first, attribute later
Establish the value of each game choice
For game balance, each choice must be reducible to simple
value and factors must even out
Ex: Pirate game
Dreadnoughts > Galleons > Brigantines
All have identical functions
If Dreadnoughts 2x powerful, then (for balance) Galleons
should take time to spawn
What if Not Easily Reducible?
Ex: Starcraft
Ex: Pirate game
Mutalisks fly over any terrain, but cannot fight

other fliers
Wraiths are not as tough, but can attack other
fliers
Observers can see enemy, but not fight
There is no expression for values since different
things!
Dreadnoughts slowest, Brigantines fastest
Interesting from gameplay, but what about
balance?
Attribute Balance
Involves not the relative values, but the way the choices
interact
Ex: How important is ship speed relative to combat
strength?
Envision as a set, where relative values based on one

factor only:
Speed: Brigantines > Galleons > Dreadnoughts
Tuffness: Dreadnoughts > Galleons > Brigantines
Range:
Can then combine to get average set combining all factors

Then, adjust component values (often, through play
testing) so all units are useful
Component versus Attribute

Balance
Mnemonic to remember:
Component choices are about artifacts
Ex: Hmm.
Should I use the ion cannon or laser?
Attribute choices are more abstract regarding use:
Ex: I should sneak past troll or take extra health
Attribute balance is harder (set of all problems)

But if can get approximate picture of better
strategies, can tweak component costs to get
game balance
Intransitive Game Mechanics (1 of 5)

Rock
Paper
Scissors
Rock
-1
+1
Paper
+1
-1
Scissors
-1
+1
Payoff, match your choice with opponent

Suppose I always picked rock. Then opponent would
notice and pick paper. Then I would start to
always pick scissors, then
spiral to center of triangle where all options equal
only break even, like thermodynamics
Suppose scissors costs most, rock costs

least
May use rock more often, scissors less

But wait, that would mean paper less useful,
too what is optimum choice now?
Suppose scissors costs 3 ki, paper costs 2
ki, rock costs 1 ki and hit does 5 ki damage

Rock
Paper
Scissors
Rock
-4
+7
Paper
+4
-4
Scissors
-7
+4
Ex: I choose scissors, you choose rock. Ki diff is 2.

Plus damage is 5, so 7 total.
Say payoff is R, P, S and frequency r, p, s
Net payoff R is (0 x r) + (-4 x p) + (7 x s)
Sum must be zero (zero sum game, whatever one

player gains other loses. Both cannot have net
gain.)
Want to know how often used (r, p, s)

1) R = -4p + 7s
2) P = 4r 4s
3) S = -7r + 4p
R+P+S=0
All costs must be equal else would favor

(remember, triangle example)
R=P=S
Solve: (3 equations in 3 unknowns)

(eq1) -4p + 7s = 4r 4s (eq2)
11s = 4r + 4p s = (4r+4p) / 11
(eq2) 0 = 4r 4(4r+4p)/11
0 = 44r 16r - 16p
0 = 28r - 16p p = (7/4)r
(eq3) 0 = -4(7/4)r + 7s
0 = 7r + 7s
r=s
Ratio r:p:s = 1 : 1.75 : 1

Rock and Scissors used 27%, Paper about 46%
Probably not what expected. Often result if one
option more expensive, others are most affected
Can use technique to adjust costs

Ex: if it turns out too many tanks relative to infantry
Enhance to more choices.
Ex: could do combination moves.
Rock + Scissors + Scissors = Garden Shears

Could be countered with Paper Weight
Strategy becomes complicated
(Can also use to justify spending more artistic assets on

paper!)
Fine, all is balanced. Players must avoid predictability
because clever opponent will exploit.
But that is barely above where have only 1 choice!
To balance so interesting, must have attribute factors that
interact (remember, the Battle of Hastings)
Other Intransitive Relationships
Can extend RPS? Sure (otherwise not useful)

More than 3 options Table 5.3 and Case Study 5.5
Less regular are 4 options Table 5.4
Figure 5.7 discusses another 4-way relationship
Infantry dominated
But, looking further, infantry only one that doesnt
have to move
Can hold territory! (In game that needs that)
Ex: In AoE, could teleport supplies by building base.

Didnt need to hold territory. Infantry useless. Even
making them cost less doesnt (expansion pack). Still
great game, but didnt need.
Combinatorial Explosions
How many attributes should there be to make

interesting?
Too few? Then becomes trivial (Ex: in Hastings, only

way to change power base is to put infantry on hill)
Too many? Then too hard to have skilled play
Rule of thumb: N factors that could modify core

mechanics, and each boolean (hill or not, rain or not
) 2N possible combinations explodes rapidly
Err on the side of caution
In Populous (EA god-game), should have lots of characters or

half-dozen? Noticed would be easier to understand game
experience with few, versatile units rather than many
specific ones.
Richard Leinfellner, Exec in charge of Bullfrog
Design Scalability
Intransitive designs are inflexible
If project lead says behind schedule, so dont

include 5th orc type
If have 5 way relationship and remove one, will have

dominated strategy
Ex: RPS and remove R always choose S
Elegant design falls like a house of cards
But is relatively easy to add components
Doesnt have to be symmetrical, can be redundant or

useful in only a few cases
Ex: scout, or special spell
Lesson, if you are going to scale, scale up not down
A Game Balance Checklist (1 of 3)
Player-Player ensures game is fair.
Increasingly important as multiplayer

increases. Symmetry works for this, but
asymmetry may be needed or more
appealing (try just broken). Make sure
any asymmetry doesnt magnify imbalance
as game progresses.
Golden rule: a player should never be put in
an unwinnable situation through no fault of
their own
Player-Game ensures player never
becomes frustrated. Continually brings

player back for more. Interface should not
present obstacles. Small rewards are
needed to guide player (fancy animation or
new powers). Best rewards widen options.
Golden rule: The game should be fun to
learn as well as to play, and it should be
more fun the more you master it
Gameplay-Gameplay makes sure no element

redundant or useless. Can do briefly by making
factor table for each attribute (fire, range )
Make sure each best at something. RPS ensures
each component dynamically best rather than
statically so. Oblige player to alter tactics. Dont
have to have every component equally useful. But
cost, availability and ease of use should reflect
value. Get right through playtesting.
Golden rule: all options in game must be worth
using sometime, net cost of each option must be on
par with payoff
Look and Feel
(Me: consider skipping this whole section)

Create a sense of alternate reality
Immersion
Ambience
Interface
Storytelling
Ambience
Everything that contributes to innate look and

feel of game
Not just spiffy graphics - GLFOPS and trilinear
filtering
Rather, how graphics are used
Two fighters on bare stage. Fine. How about

dirty street, realistic crowd hooting and hollering.
Dark skies
Ex: Fiery hell when battling boss in Battlegrounds
Ambience is about providing background for story

Broadly Sound, Vision, Touch
Sound
Wistful guitar in Diablo

Ethnic rhythms in AoE
Stirring call to arms in Warcraft
Whimsical in QBicles
Best does ambience plus gameplay
Ex: Thief
Come out taffer, looking for you

Just a rat, you are safe
Ex: LOTR
Stirring music when level nearly over (but can still die!)
Vision
The "look" of the game

Concept art
Broad strokes, not pixel
finished detail
Rough sketches of characters
or settings
- Paolo Piselli
Vision Example
Concept Art
Movie
Touch
Not really touch, but physicality of games look and

feel handling of game
Ex: early animation characters did not move right
Disney pioneered with physical attributes that felt
right, moved with weight
Contrast
Ex:
Ex:
Ex:
Ex:
Ex:
comic-book acrobatics in Smash Bros

bouncing vehicles in Mario Kart
realistic crashes in Mid-town Madness
super-players in Lego Soccer
realism in Madden (actually, guys 1.5 times faster)
Interface
Ideal is transparent
Ex: LOTR BfME novel way when click

expands with choices
Ex: Status can be in formation or
appearance (not health hit-points, say)
Doesnt have to be invisible
Ex: racing game expects dash

Ex: flight sim interface can look like cockpit
Ex: less is more (small square more annoying
than framing with interface)
Can enhance look and feel
Storytelling
No need of story? After all, supposed to be

interactive.
If you want to tell a story, write a book.
Bah. Consider choose your own adventure
Ex: Doom two factions
1) Strong setting and backstory enhance game

2) Story? We dont need no stinking story!
Action takes care of itself
Interactive can help user create story

Ex: Half-life
Stronger want to suspend disbelief of user but need
to make them want to suspend
Ex: Starwars merely some sword fights and vehicle
chases. Need to know who Luke is, why hes in the
spaceship. Why the battle
Toolbox of Storytelling Techniques
Best not chunks of action with static
facts
Details revealed to audience let them
figure it out
Get emotional involvement from audience
Storytellers knew tricks for creating good
stories long before Shakespeare Game
Designers should employ
Obstacles, Plot Points, Foreshadowing
(More next)
Obstacles
Old man runs to hero in inn.

on hill. You have to kill it.
Says Vampire
Poor
Old man enters inn.
Avoids hero.
Purchases crucifix from another. Mumbles
you better have one if you are in these
parts.
Not great, but better. Has obstacle
Viewer must find out himself/herself

Tricked into level of acceptance not
obtained if just told, too artificial
Foreshadowing
A story depicts the intrusion of the world

on status quo
Ex: AoE settlement grows to large city

Ex: Total Recall construction worker spy
Foreshadowing occurs early, before

intrusion, hints at what is to come
Ex: AoE small bandits come, fought off

Ex: Total Recall dream of spy
Personalization
Novice author Ex: save the world, because big
Need to add person reason so audience cares
Careful not to make personal hook in backstory

might skip
But not compelling, so only you can save it

Still weak
Ex: you have two hours to save the world versus you
have two hours to find your niece lost at sunset
Ex: Luke told must save galaxy. Why? Drawn in by
personal (Princess Leia)
Resistance
Back of mind saying it isnt true

Need to pull them along
Ex: Bruce Willis, drinking at dingy strip
club. Two suits say you must save

president from terrorist. Does he jump
up and get to work? No. Snarls Im
retired. Takes another drink.
We want him to change his mind. Rooting
for him before main character does.
Plot Points (1 of 2)
Importance of confounding expectations

Ex: Gandalf on quest to Mount Doom. Boring if that
is exactly what happens
Gets killed early on (and comes back), not expected
Adventure games benefit most, but can do for

other games, too
Aristotle reversal, discovery, calamity
Ex: trying to save kid, causing her death (reversal)

Ex: finding Swiss account number on victim
(discovery)
Ex: bomb going off, killing hero (calamity)
Plot Points (2 of 2)
Games, too.
Whammo every 10 minutes, turn story in different

direction
Ex: strategy game find cliff so army built up wont

work (reversal)
Ex: tunnel for small commando force (discovery)
Big ones (Luke, I am your father) divide into levels or

acts
Movies - setup, conflict, resolution
Early plot points deepen mystery, later clear it up (not

always completely)
Overarching structure, hierarchical in plot points
But games whole season (40 hours), not one movie

Best if can integrate in game without cut-scenes
Suspense
Ex: Unbeatable foe (Gorgon, only beat by

lure to trap). With save game let hero
try. After 9 times, try something else.
Death of lead character destroys illusion
Instead, provide clues, suspense.
Bodies,
rotting, see NPC get eaten. Hear sounds.
Can see gorgon survive rock crash.
Dialog
One picture worth a thousand words
Good dialog serves more than one purpose
Dont tell what know, but also reveal
Surprise
Dont have needless dialog when visual will do

Ex: telling about bomb. How long? Plenty of time
smoke cigarette, call mom dont read War and
Peace. Reminds of mortality.
Do you expect me to talk?
No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die
Resolution
Should be:
Many examples of stories/games where above fails
Hard won no reward is satisfying if too easy (most computer

games not this)
Not obvious dont want ending one been seeing for 10 hours (yet
should still make sense looking back)
Satisfying usually morally (hero wins) but could be aesthetically
(tragedy)
Consistent with character, style development
Achieve closure resolve story
Diablo 2 defeat Diablo then 60 seconds to end.
Might and Magic 2 long struggle, mystery. Very end, control panel
15 minutes to decode Fourscore and seven years Solved it,
asteroid missed, thank you and go home
Ex: A Christmas Story decoder ring drink Ovaltine
Change
Stories set in interesting times
No Sir Gawain shops for bread. Rather,

marries hag, one week until green knight
chops head off
Sometimes, return to normal
Inner change is often point of story
No Frodo lives in Shire with friends,

rather learns of evil, innocence to selfknowledge
Whats Next?
Art (2d, 3d, audio)

Architecture
Wrap up

The Game Development Process

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Game Development Process

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Game Development Process

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Game Development

The Creative Process

Nurturing the Creative Process

Creativity is not intellectual anarchy

Facilitate creative process

Stuff head with concepts and associations

Cant notice association between Post Office and

Network Routing if dont know anything about either

How? Read (All great game designers?)

Nurturing the Creative Process Read

Make reading a lifelong process

Wonder as you read (Why is the sky blue? Why do

More than SciFi and Fantasy books

Tightens up Web of associations

Find answers to wonders

Help build overall creative foundation

Nurturing the Creative Process

More than computer games board games

Columbia Games, Avalon Hill, RPGs

Pick titles you would not otherwise play

Nurturing the Creative Process

Perhaps games not as broad as film

Draw upon wide range of sources for inspiration

Originality in gameplay, story, setting, interface

Stephen King originality when put familiar together

Shoot em ups like Alien

Ex: vampire in pirate setting (turns to shark)

Based on Ch 1, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Nurturing the Creative Process Brainstorm

Brainstorming has been much studied, and

there have been found some common

Having the Idea

How many industries can claim to deal in

With an idea, dont implement or tie down to

Enjoy the 1% because everything else is hard work

Think of many raw ideas to throw into game

May come up with hybrid

Based on Ch 1, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Nurturing the Creative Process

Most ideas shouldnt grow further

Just because it is a creative idea, does not

Be aggressive at this point in your own mind

Others soon will, so you should first

Then, when pushing the idea (to, say, a

publisher) through to a concept, make sure

Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford

The Creative Process The

Once you have an idea

Based on pages 233+, Gameplay and Design, by Kevin Oxland

The Creative Process Define the

Consider target audience

Determine how player will interface

Consider theme (not graphical theme)

Will help determine genre

Has features been done before? If not, is there a

Based on pages 233+, Gameplay and Design, by Kevin Oxland

The Creative Process Involving

Never design by committee