Game Doc Question
Ok i am working on a gmae design doc and was wondering some thing for my table of contents
This is just the start of the TOC right now.....
1. Contents
2. Introduction
2.1. Philosophy
2.2. Features and Concepts
2.3. Historical Background
3. Overview
3.1. Civilizations
3.1.1. Greeks
3.1.2. Persians
3.1.3. Romans
3.1.4. Celts
3.1.5. Carthaginians
3.1.6. Macedonians
3.2. Game World
3.3. Interface
3.4. Concept Art
Now my question is i have some smaller subsections so I include them
IE
1. Contents
2. Introduction
2.1. Philosophy
2.1.1. Parts of RTS games
2.1.1.1. Strategy
2.1.1.1.1. Tactics
2.1.1.1.2. Economic Management
2.1.1.2 Time
2.1.2. Replayablity & Style Variation
2.1.3. BLAH BLAH BLAH
2.2. Features and Concepts
2.2.1. Feature
2.2.1.1. BLAH BLAH BLAH
2.2.2 Concepts
2.3. Historical Background
EcT
Now should i go that deatiled? should i say with the basic outline? or should i do soe thng between?
Thanx Mokon
Mokon of Spartan Studios
Mokon of Spartan Studios
Aim for as detailed as possible. This is what you will look at for the entire project. Aim for 200 pages.
LevelguyCurrent Project: Upgrade to Visual C++.NET25%
For the Actual Table of Contents I would stick with the first one, and then maybe if it was like a section like "Features" where your going to have like 10 - 20 difference features all explained, then I would have a mini Table of Contents just for that section.
When I look at the second version of your table of contents I was confused right away and I wouldn''t have wanted to read any further, however in the first version I could easily see the main sections, so again if I was looking for information on a special feature I could easily see where that section was and then I''d be that much closer right away, once I got to the features section I could see a list of features (or even a list of feature categories) and then choose what I was looking for.
I guess the way I see it would would make it so you read the book almost like you where broswing it on the web.
Please visit Turt99 Productions
When I look at the second version of your table of contents I was confused right away and I wouldn''t have wanted to read any further, however in the first version I could easily see the main sections, so again if I was looking for information on a special feature I could easily see where that section was and then I''d be that much closer right away, once I got to the features section I could see a list of features (or even a list of feature categories) and then choose what I was looking for.
I guess the way I see it would would make it so you read the book almost like you where broswing it on the web.
Please visit Turt99 Productions
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
Recommended Tutorials
Advertisement