I haven''t read all three pages, but here''s my input:

One person coming up with the initial design doc is just fine. However, I believe that further collab. with both the art and programming teams is a must. As everyone knows, not everything in the initial design lasts, and compromises must be meet (be it because of technical or gameplay issues). One gameplay mechanic that may make perfect sense on paper may, in practice, be flawed. Other team members should be "allowed" to point out these kinds of flaws, whether they''re large or small. Yes, the designer should help carry the "vision" through development, but they also need to be able to modify that "vision" for the "good of the game".

Most of the time when egos get in the way of changing the design of a game, the end result is rather bad. For some examples, look no further than Black and White or Derek Smart.

Lastly, I don''t know about anyone else, but as a "designer" I prefer to leave the "story" part of the game upto a professional writer. Why? Do I not have "great, awesome" story ideas? Of course I do, everyone does, but usually such ideas are only good in our own eyes. A professional writer can handle dialogue and story a million times better than a game designer can. There was a good article on this awhile ago, but I dont have the link.

quote: Original post by Fruny
Oh, come on now, one of the few threads that is not filled with the usual questions, flames or lounge idiocy and you want to kill it so soon ?

Heh, sorry about that. I was only suggesting that the inter-personal exchange that seems headed toward a collaboration is better handled via email than on the forum. I know I would admonish others to do likewise, so I might as well lead by example.

quote: So what if it has gone off-topic, it''s still enjoyable to read.

Fortunately, others have rejoined the thread. Unfortunately, virtually all points about why amateur/indie designers prefer to work alone have been covered. It remains to be seen if anything else can come of this thread or if it''s run its course.

I think it's important to be quite clear who's design you're making. Sometimes too little control and authority can make things just as difficult.

We had to make a short film as part of our uni course, and one of our group was meant to be directing it, as she had co-written the script. Fine, all good - but to me that meant she had authority and it was curcial that she used it. We (the cast) would be asking questions like "how should I say this line? Which way should I look? Faster or slower?" and so on, and for each one she basically said "yeah like that. um, yeah, however you think" etc. This actually made things harder, because we were never corrected and never told how it should be. So if someone is in charge, I think they have to be authoritative about it.

That said, a group of people all working on what they think is their baby is a recipie for disaster. I think that you have to decide who's design you are going to make, and stick to that arrangement.

The key thing, I reckon, is that the job of design is very different depending on whether it's your own design you're working on, or someone else's. If it's yours, then you should have control over it and should be ensuring it's exactly as you want it. However, if you're working on someone else's design then your role is to make it how they want it , NOT how you think it should be . Instead of saying, "I made the trees for the spooky forest like this because that's how I think they should look", you should be asking questions like, "how do these look? Are they too spooky? Not spooky enough? Do you want them more zombie-spooky or ghost-spooky? Disney-spooky or Silent Hill-spooky?" and so on.

Of course this isn't to say that you should be completely submissive and not put anything of your own forward, but again you should be suggesting how to enhance their design, NOT how to make their design more like yours.

EDIT: damn tag things...

[edited by - BiggerStaff on March 15, 2004 6:25:06 AM]

quote: Original post by sunandshadow
It has been my experience that when game designers think of building a team and making a game, they always imagine themselves as the lone designer on top of the heap. Why is this? Do they really feel qualified to design a whole game by themselves?

Is it that the game idea and commitment to it comes first, and persuing this makes the person a game designer? Is it that people only create game design ideas cooperatively when they''re friends IRL and can talk to each other face-to-face? Or what?

Having managed 4 game projects now (with teams ranging from one person to 68), all as the lead-designer, I''ll offer my two cents in response to your questions.

I personally think that the concept of "design by committee" is doomed to failure. (And I''m sure someone can point out the exception that proves the rule.) I always start a project by explaining that I run things as a "benevolant dictator." I''ll listen to everyone and consider any input the team members want to offer. But in the end, I''m going to make the decision. Especially when it involves a tough call.

A project must have what I call a "keeper of the vision." That person who has that passionate belief in the fundamental concept, and at the end of the process is the one who will be accountable for any shortcomings of the project. And it is critical that the person in that role has the experience, courage and vision to make the tough calls. And to deal with both the times he/she is right as well and when he is wrong.

While I''ve worked for the last seven years to pioneer my concept of open online development, inviting the future players to participate in the design and development of the product, in the end, its me that''s going to make the final decisions. Input and suggestions are great; but when the pedal meets the metal, its me and my reputation (and my vision) that is on the line. And I''m going to make the call. While I consider all input and ideas, the bottom line is that its my concept and my plan. And I''m the only one who is constantly looking at that whole "big picture" scenario and understands how all the details tie together to deliver a final cohesive product.

I''ve worked in a consulting capacity on some projects that were attempts at designing by committee (actually taking votes on key decisions) and from my experience, that approach is almost always doomed to failure. To me, the concepts of creativity and committees just seem to create an oxymoron when combined in the same sentence.

Of course, the key to being able to successfully use my approach lies in being able to convince the team members (and players if you use my "open" model) that my vision is solid and I do in fact know what I''m doing and where the project is going. If I can''t do that, then I can''t realistically expect that they''ll follow me through the long and grueling process of seeing the project from concept to release.

(And one little secret I''ll share. It might not work for everyone, but so far, its worked for me. When I recruit people, or attempt to sell the concept to either players, publishers or sponsors, I make absolutely sure that I have a _total_ plan in place. I make sure that I am never confronted with questions or requests for details that I am not prepared to answer without hesitation. For one of my projects, the preliminary design document was about 300 pages. And that was before we entered the formal "deisgn" phase of the project. Whether I''m talking to a potential publisher, sponsor, or team member, I do everything I possibly can to make sure that there will never be a question brought up that I haven''t already thought through and am prepared to answer. That isn''t easy to do, and it requires a real commitment to planning and design. I literally spent two years designing and planning SpiritWars before I approached publishers - or potential team members - with the concept. And when I finish with Power Politics III this summer and move on to my next project, I will be working with a project that has been in the "design" stage for over four years and is fully matured, documented, and ready for a full development effort.)

My approach might not work for everyone. But I figured I''d share it. It''s kept me in business for twelve years now. It''s not an easy approach, but this is a very difficult industry in which to participate and compete. The bottom line is that the vast majority of people fail. And not just indie-developers. I can list at least 150 publishers that have gone out of business since I started my company back in 1991. But if you want to find an edge and attempt to make it as a small developer, you had better be willing to work harder and be better prepared than any of your competition. Anything less than that is almost guaranteed to result in failure.

Hope that doesn''t sound too harsh and cynical. But its best that people realize how difficult this is, and just how hard it is to create a slim chance of success. But I also believe that if you have a viable concept, and you are willing to make that extra effort, you can carve out a market and succeed.

I''ll get off my soap box now and go back to browsing the posts...

quote: Original post by RandyChase

quote: Original post by sunandshadow
It has been my experience that when game designers think of building a team and making a game, they always imagine themselves as the lone designer on top of the heap. Why is this? Do they really feel qualified to design a whole game by themselves?

Is it that the game idea and commitment to it comes first, and pursuing this makes the person a game designer? Is it that people only create game design ideas cooperatively when they''re friends IRL and can talk to each other face-to-face? Or what?

Having managed 4 game projects now (with teams ranging from one person to 68), all as the lead-designer, I''ll offer my two cents in response to your questions.

I personally think that the concept of "design by committee" is doomed to failure. (And I''m sure someone can point out the exception that proves the rule.) I always start a project by explaining that I run things as a "benevolent dictator." I''ll listen to everyone and consider any input the team members want to offer. But in the end, I''m going to make the decision. Especially when it involves a tough call.

A project must have what I call a "keeper of the vision." That person who has that passionate belief in the fundamental concept, and at the end of the process is the one who will be accountable for any shortcomings of the project. And it is critical that the person in that role has the experience, courage and vision to make the tough calls. And to deal with both the times he/she is right as well and when he is wrong.

While I''ve worked for the last seven years to pioneer my concept of open online development, inviting the future players to participate in the design and development of the product, in the end, its me that''s going to make the final decisions. Input and suggestions are great; but when the pedal meets the metal, its me and my reputation (and my vision) that is on the line. And I''m going to make the call. While I consider all input and ideas, the bottom line is that its my concept and my plan. And I''m the only one who is constantly looking at that whole "big picture" scenario and understands how all the details tie together to deliver a final cohesive product.

I''ve worked in a consulting capacity on some projects that were attempts at designing by committee (actually taking votes on key decisions) and from my experience, that approach is almost always doomed to failure. To me, the concepts of creativity and committees just seem to create an oxymoron when combined in the same sentence.

Of course, the key to being able to successfully use my approach lies in being able to convince the team members (and players if you use my "open" model) that my vision is solid and I do in fact know what I''m doing and where the project is going. If I can''t do that, then I can''t realistically expect that they''ll follow me through the long and grueling process of seeing the project from concept to release.

(And one little secret I''ll share. It might not work for everyone, but so far, its worked for me. When I recruit people, or attempt to sell the concept to either players, publishers or sponsors, I make absolutely sure that I have a _total_ plan in place. I make sure that I am never confronted with questions or requests for details that I am not prepared to answer without hesitation. For one of my projects, the preliminary design document was about 300 pages. And that was before we entered the formal "design" phase of the project. Whether I''m talking to a potential publisher, sponsor, or team member, I do everything I possibly can to make sure that there will never be a question brought up that I haven''t already thought through and am prepared to answer. That isn''t easy to do, and it requires a real commitment to planning and design. I literally spent two years designing and planning SpiritWars before I approached publishers - or potential team members - with the concept. And when I finish with Power Politics III this summer and move on to my next project, I will be working with a project that has been in the "design" stage for over four years and is fully matured, documented, and ready for a full development effort.)

My approach might not work for everyone. But I figured I''d share it. It''s kept me in business for twelve years now. It''s not an easy approach, but this is a very difficult industry in which to participate and compete. The bottom line is that the vast majority of people fail. And not just indie-developers. I can list at least 150 publishers that have gone out of business since I started my company back in 1991. But if you want to find an edge and attempt to make it as a small developer, you had better be willing to work harder and be better prepared than any of your competition. Anything less than that is almost guaranteed to result in failure.

Hope that doesn''t sound too harsh and cynical. But its best that people realize how difficult this is, and just how hard it is to create a slim chance of success. But I also believe that if you have a viable concept, and you are willing to make that extra effort, you can carve out a market and succeed.

I''ll get off my soap box now and go back to browsing the posts...

Fantastic post.

Experience backed up with viable reasoning, just correct.

quote: Original post by Beige
I think that most of the designers you see around here have either a very focused, highly developed idea of what they want already, or they have a very vague idea that they think is highly focused developed.

Either way, they are unlikely to share it, and if they do, they may simply post it to gain approval.

The ideas you see which people are most receptive to criticism towards, are ones that are disconnected from the designer themselves.

If you want to criticize an idea that Joe Svenson has for his game Svensonworld, they''re going to come across as defensive about it. If you criticize an idea that Joe has for "a MMORPG," then you''ll probably see them as more cooperative.

Let''s face it, a lot of us have our egos wrapped up in these pet projects of ours. Sometimes so much that nobody else''s is going to fit in.

I find that designers that know how and when to delegate - well, not just designers, but any one who has to lead a team; that they usually output a better product. It''s one thing to have a unified, clear view, and that''s good. But, come on, you''re only one person.

The design of a game is restricted a great deal by how much it''s actually possible to get done in real life. Since design reaches into all areas; content creation, coding, you name it - it''s essential that you not only create a coherent vision, but a malleable plan to execute it. It''s unlikely you''ll find people that will fight with you about your vision. But people will be more likely to disagree about how you plan to do it. And being able to get your vision across will ensure that, no matter how many cooks are making the broth, it''ll still taste like broth in the end.

I''m rambling

Your view is to narrow, i for one except critics as helpers rather than people looking to tell me that my idea should be put into a shredder.

If a lot of people turn to me and point of similar or the same things in my work which don''t gel together or are just plane out of place why wouldn''t i lisen to them and do something about it?

And btw, a game designer or not a content designer.

I''m designing a game as in writing everything down, organizing it, editing it etc. I am not using anything but MS Word and note pad at the moment and i wont be for about 12 month''s till I''m happy with what i have made in the design document.

As the above poster pointed out, cover all your bases, dot every i and cross every t before doing anything else which to me includes making anything to do with a game or showing it to anyone except people who can give good opinions about your work and suggest changes.

I have an objective of rewriting the way RPGs like final fantasy perform and play just as final fantasy rewrote the way dungeons and dragons plays on a console, everything needs to move on and become better at some point from cars with better parts and systems to the next generation to media player the way dvds took over from VHS, my game, if done well will do the same for RPGs. If people want to tell me what i should change in my work why would i argue the toss if they make a good point?

quote: Original post by Siolis
Your view is to narrow, i for one except critics as helpers rather than people looking to tell me that my idea should be put into a shredder.

If a lot of people turn to me and point of similar or the same things in my work which don''t gel together or are just plane out of place why wouldn''t i lisen to them and do something about it?

I don''t mean any of this as a direct criticism, just something I''ve observed around here.

quote: And btw, a game designer or not a content designer.

Er... what do you mean?

quote: I''m designing a game as in writing everything down, organizing it, editing it etc. I am not using anything but MS Word and note pad at the moment and i wont be for about 12 month''s till I''m happy with what i have made in the design document.

As the above poster pointed out, cover all your bases, dot every i and cross every t before doing anything else which to me includes making anything to do with a game or showing it to anyone except people who can give good opinions about your work and suggest changes.

I have an objective of rewriting the way RPGs like final fantasy perform and play just as final fantasy rewrote the way dungeons and dragons plays on a console, everything needs to move on and become better at some point from cars with better parts and systems to the next generation to media player the way dvds took over from VHS, my game, if done well will do the same for RPGs. If people want to tell me what i should change in my work why would i argue the toss if they make a good point?

I don''t know. I''m certainly not trying to suggest that designers SHOULD be wrapped up in their egos.

quote: Original post by Beige

quote: Original post by Siolis
Your view is to narrow, i for one except critics as helpers rather than people looking to tell me that my idea should be put into a shredder.

If a lot of people turn to me and point of similar or the same things in my work which don''t gel together or are just plane out of place why wouldn''t i lisen to them and do something about it?

I don''t mean any of this as a direct criticism, just something I''ve observed around here.

Well you seemed to be suggesting that their are none who do like critics, just pointing out that some do.

quote: Original post by Beige

quote: Original post by Siolis

quote: And btw, a game designer or not a content designer.

Er... what do you mean?

"And btw, a game designer is not a content designer"

I didn''t check over what i wrote, sorry, it should make sense now.

quote: Original post by Beige

quote: Original post by Siolis

quote: I''m designing a game as in writing everything down, organizing it, editing it etc. I am not using anything but MS Word and note pad at the moment and i wont be for about 12 month''s till I''m happy with what i have made in the design document.

As the above poster pointed out, cover all your bases, dot every i and cross every t before doing anything else which to me includes making anything to do with a game or showing it to anyone except people who can give good opinions about your work and suggest changes.

I have an objective of rewriting the way RPGs like final fantasy perform and play just as final fantasy rewrote the way dungeons and dragons plays on a console, everything needs to move on and become better at some point from cars with better parts and systems to the next generation to media player the way dvds took over from VHS, my game, if done well will do the same for RPGs. If people want to tell me what i should change in my work why would i argue the toss if they make a good point?

I don''t know. I''m certainly not trying to suggest that designers SHOULD be wrapped up in their egos.

Rhetorical question...


RPG: I''m going to rewrite this genera even if it kills me.

Biggerstaff - About the idea that assistant designers should be working to wards the lead designer''s vision, not their own - In my opinion one of the most importan duties of the lead designer is to communicate his vision clearly and compellingly to his staff. Tho achieve synchronicity of vision such that what the assistant designer wants _is_ what the lead designer wants. Of course this is an ideal and won''t work in every case, but an assistant designer who can take in the whole of the lead''s design can look at it objectively in a way the lead himself can''t, and suggest changes that would make the game more successful at achieving the lead''s vision. Yes somebody has to make the final decisions, but once the lead shares his vision thoroughly with the team it becomes the team''s vision, and the team has both the duty and the right to help edit and perfect that vision.


Siolis - "A game designer is not a content designer." Where do you suppose the boundary between design and content is, exactly? It seems a rather fuzzy line to me. Does the designer decide who the main character is, or does the writer? Does the designer decide what the main character looks like, or does the artist? What about cases where the designer has assigned to himself the responsibility for producing one area of the content?

quote: Original post by sunandshadow
Siolis - "A game designer is not a content designer." Where do you suppose the boundary between design and content is, exactly? It seems a rather fuzzy line to me. Does the designer decide who the main character is, or does the writer? Does the designer decide what the main character looks like, or does the artist? What about cases where the designer has assigned to himself the responsibility for producing one area of the content?

Ok maybe game designer is a too narrow term to use then, how about concept designer.

I am a concept designer as I''m coming up with my games concept which i will show to a company such as code-masters for its production or alternatively i will build all of it myself but it will be more basic ie 2d graphics. Although there will be graphics designers, area designers ETC the original designer is the concept designer.

I suppose a game designer is someone who designs the game but in different context you also take the phrase game designer as something else.

What i should have said then was that a Game Or Concept Designer is not the same as a Content designer, content designers make graphics and so on to specifications of the concept designer which effectively makes the Concept designer the lead designer becuase in the end the game is his creation.

Also IMO committee concept designing is not a good idea as everyone dose have their own idea on what the game should be like, suggestions on how the game should run things like its battle system however should be welcomed becuase that can improve the game to have many peoples views on it but suggestions on concept are not welcome becuase then the idea of what the game is becomes warped which ruins the game IMO.

SD

quote: Original post by Siolis
Ok maybe game designer is a too narrow term to use then, how about concept designer.

Ah, you mean the mythical position of ''Idea Guy''!

[ MSVC Fixes | STL Docs | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost
Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff | Tiny XML | STLPort]