Does anyone else do this... (design philosophies)

[GarageGothic]

I was just wondering, when you start planning a game, do you ever write down (or even just think about) your "design philosphy" for that specific game? Or do you just "make it up as you go along"?

What I mean by "design philosphy" spans from basic issues such as "can the player character die?", "will I allow walking deads?" to minor issues such as "do I want the player to repeat an action once he's solved the underlying puzzle" (putting the steps into the holes in the tree in MI2, using the key on the car each time i Pleurghburg). I presume that each of us have some design standards that we've learned from playing other games. I think most people here follow the LucasArt design philosophy in many matters (dying, walking deads, not awarding points). But I'm sure that you must at times come across certain issues that haven't been covered yet, or somehow seem illogical and need revision. But are you conscious about this, and do you ever put it into words, or even writing?

I have a "design philosphy" section in my design document where I put down things that come to mind, either while thinking/writing about my own game, or while playing other games. Some of the points are manifesto-like, others are solutions to minor annoyances from other games. For instance I remember one thing I noted: "You shouldn't have to hunt around for common and inexpensive objects (string, a nail - stuff like that) which the player character could buy in any store. If you need, say, string in another puzzle, let the player have it in her inventory already, maybe from unpacking a parcel." In my experience, creating such limitations often open up for brand new approaches to puzzles and gameplay.

I'd love to hear you approach to design philosphies and what you do to keep it in mind while designing the actual game.

[Renal Shutdown]

Hey

I kinda do, so much as:

I know what I dislike, and therefore, will try to avoid using it.  The car key thing in P:DA really got on my wick, so I would not use anything like that.  Unlock it once, then second time just click "use car".

I agree with the example of the parcel = string you gave, and I have got many notes on puzzles and things laying around.  I also make notes on things I've liked in other games, for future reference.

I guess what I do could be called a "design philosophy", but I have a habit of writing things everywhere (napkins, inside of cigertte packets, envelopes, walls..) so it gets rather confusing.  Also, I've never really been conscious of doing it.  If you hadn't asked the question, I'd still be blissfully unware.

I don't know whether I should thank you or curse you for shattering one the many bubble-like worlds I have created for myself, which I randomly drift from one to another...

Ah..  to hell with it, I'll just hug you instead.

Hugs
Iqu

[furrylilkreature]

I think of a short game and then remember the important parts and whatever I need I put to make it better except scripting

[m0ds]

With Kinky Island and FoY I took the dumbass approach of just writing down ideas and letting them form as development grew. Thankfully I've still got time to go back and rework the design process.

However, over the times of film-making I've realised that the best way to do things is the propper way. Okay, so there's no propper way when designing an adventure game but you've always got to remember you're the director. That way, you can get down a rough. Then work on fleshing it out, puzzles etc. Draw diagrams, storyboards etc etc.

Rodekill made a good tutorial on game design which was on the AGDzine. But that's down at the moment.

m0ds

[M]

With Kinky Island and FoY I took the dumbass approach of just writing down ideas and letting them form as development grew.

Yeah, I sorta do that. I write down the stuff I want to do and give myself the main outline of a situation, but I don't go into huge specifics like dialogs and the exact lay out of rooms and stuff, I like to give myself some creative freedom for when I get to that stage - so I can express myself dependant on the mood I'm in rather than copying exactly from a sheet of paper or whatever.

That said, for the game I'm doing now I've planned out the whole story but I keep getting new ideas in the middle of making it so it just keeps getting slightly longer or takes a twist making me rethink the stuff I've planned for later.

[Dave Gilbert]

Well, I do things a bit backward.  I develop a character first, and let the game develop from there.  I like my characters to be consistant, with distinctive traits, likes, dislikes and neurosis.  That's something I tried to do with Josh Beachcomber in "Purity of the Surf."  His violent reactions to unhealthy food, his fear of getting a job, his simple attitude towards living, etc all came across in everything he did.  

Also, if it's a serious game, keep it serious.  If your character is desperate, scared, and running for his life, that is not the time to make silly comments about the weather.  This is harder than it sounds.  I'm writing a serious game, and for some reason I am always compelled to add flippant responses and jokes to various actions.  It's something we do instinctively, I think.  It's difficult to fight it.  

[Nacho]

Well... I follow the philosophy of Lucasarts...

First of all I think in a history... I write it like if it was a novel... then I turn into a walkthrough, makinf all the puzzles easy and logical, and then... I fill the game with lots of things to do if you´re stucked, like Lucas did, conversations, jokes, useless puzzles...

And of course, the main character can´t die.

[Matt Brown]

I do it as follows

1. vauge idea enters mind
2. think of one or two puzzles
3. write a little storyboard
4. begin
5. throw most of it out the window as I start

[DragonRose]

GG, you post some really neat topics.

I always have the same "philosiphy."

Death, yes, if it's painfully obvious that the character will die.  

Walking deaths, no, they are the tool of evil demons.

Points, yes, as long as there is stuff you can miss and still complete the game.

Repeting puzzles... hmm, tricky.  I hated the keys on the car thing in Pleurghburg.  But I like it when the you learn that doing one thing gets a reaction, and doing it in a different context will make the same thing happen.  Like in GK1 when you switch on the fan to make the snake run away because of the thumping sounds.

I try to keep in mind that I'm the only one that knows how the story is going to end, so I'm the only one that knows exactly what is going to come next.  Ergo, if I want to be able to complete the game, the story has to flow logically.

[rodekill]

Rodekill made a good tutorial on game design which was on the AGDzine. But that's down at the moment

It's still nicely available at it's home.

http://www.rodekill.com/read.html

[GarageGothic]

Argh, this thread got off topic very quickly. It's as if most people just read the replies instead of the first post. (thanks for all the feedback though, and thanks to Dragonrose for the compliment.)

I wasn't talking about HOW the design process works, or how to design a game. Rather I was asking if people set up "rules" for the actual design. Do's and don'ts for what you can or can't (or shouldn't) do when designing. Maybe I just wasn't very clear about it.

[AndersM]

I begin by drawing some backgrounds, and if they turn out good, and I liked them, I start to think about how to use them in a game... This may sound strange, but if I first makes a plot and then start drawing, it might turn out bad, and then I'm stuck with this plot that I can't draw backgrounds to. Using my way, I might end up with some backgrounds that I never use, but I still feel more confotable this way...

[rodekill]

Ok.
DO read my thingy.
DON'T make it up as you go along.

[DGMacphee from Uni]

I only have one game philosophy (or rule), which I strive not to break:

"Never set out to make a boring game -- Make it funny, sad, heartwarming, alienated, or whatever, but just don't make it boring!"

I think Ultimerr and Stickmen are interesting games, and I hope Dark Hero is interesting too when I finish it.

[DGMacphee]

Actually, just to add to that philosophy, I've heard a filmmaker once say about movies:

"Never make a film that you would never go see!"

I think that links to my philosophy very greatly -- I'd never want to play a boring game, thus I'd never want to make one.

[Trapezoid]

That's a rather obvious philosophy. Also, never make a bad game. Or a game that sucks.

[DGMacphee]

Most philosphies are obvious.

Take, for example, "I think, therefore I am."

Obviously, I exist because I can think.

And obviously, I don't want to play a boring game.

Therefore, my philosophy is "Never make a boring game!"

I'd decribe it more as 'simple' than 'obvious'.

If I have a simple philosophy that guides my game making, then it becomes easier for me than all these complex rules.

And if I'm bored making my game, my audience will be bored playing my game.

Simple, and it guides me.