Simulation = running a system that models something (often a subset of the real world) Narration = telling a story It occurred to me that these two concepts summarize two approaches to game design: Narration A game built on narrative lines is one where the main focus lies in the progression of plot-like game events. Where the design document typically has a timeline or web to illustrate the flow of the game. Typical games of this type include many adventure games, a lot of platform games, games like Half-Life or Deus Ex, single player campaign games in RTSs... games with a lot of linearity in their structure. Simulation A simulative game is one where the main focus lies in the evolution of the game state over time according to the rules of the simulation. The core element of the design is the set of rules and the initial conditions. Examples include Civilisation, X-COM, Elite, Creatures, Sim City, and of course, practically anything with ''sim'' or ''simulator'' in the title. I suspect most MMORPGs should belong to this category as well, but, never having played any... Some games may have a mixed approach (actually RTSs in general are generally simulative in their game engine and only narrative in campaign structure, but with scripted "plot" events and special units, the narrative structure tends to dominate) and specific games within genres may actually take an unusual design approach. And then there may be some games whose apparent design philosophy doesn''t fit either category. Advantages of the narrative approach: Plot and flavour are built into the design. The player generally has clear goals to pursue. Special cases and triggered events/cut-scenes are also integral. Unexpected behaviour of the game is kept to a minimum. Disadvantages of the narrative approach: Games tend to be very linear. Particularly in adventure games, special cases and one-off solutions to puzzles can proliferate. The rules can easily get complicated and hard to follow. All features have to be introduced "by hand" Advantages of simulation: The rule set is often much simpler compared to the complexity of the end result. A lot of features come "for free" as emergent phenomena. Games tend to be very non-linear. Features tend to be more intuitive. Disadvantages of simulation: Players often find themselves lacking direction. Plot and cut-scenes are hard to build into the game. Unexpected interactions can break a game completely. Comments anyone? I''d like to know: what people think about the two approaches; if there are any other approaches that complement these two (or if there are other ways of looking at the design process that produce different classifications); when each approach should be used; anything else anyone thinks is relevant.