That's where the designers skill come in play.
If the game design is bad then it will need to be changed during development.. Or created if it's not very detailed.

I find it so extremely unprofessional for teams to completely change their game design in middle of development.

To be able to take into account all possible programming features and limitations in advance, you need to be a really good programmer.

To be able to decide exactly how your artist would draw the art for the game, you need to be an artist. How else would you write detailed instructions on drawing, for example, a knight who took an arrow to the knee?

So, are you saying that Programming and Art are two vital skills that a game designer would need to have?

[quote name='glhf' timestamp='1334926959' post='4933176']
That's where the designers skill come in play.
If the game design is bad then it will need to be changed during development.. Or created if it's not very detailed.

I find it so extremely unprofessional for teams to completely change their game design in middle of development.

To be able to take into account all possible programming features and limitations in advance, you need to be a really good programmer.

To be able to decide exactly how your artist would draw the art for the game, you need to be an artist. How else would you write detailed instructions on drawing, for example, a knight who took an arrow to the knee?

So, are you saying that Programming and Art are two vital skills that a game designer would need to have?
[/quote]

You should have at least basic programming and art knowledge yes to be a good game designer.
And when you hire an artist you look at his portfolio to get an idea of his art style.. Because that's how the art he will create for your game will look most similar to.
If you want manga art for your game then you go to an artist that draws manga for example.

So you haven't actually stopped arguing like you said you would... but you also still haven't given a SINGLE example to back up your claims. I don't think you can - prove me wrong if you're able.

So you haven't actually stopped arguing like you said you would... but you also still haven't given a SINGLE example to back up your claims. I don't think you can - prove me wrong if you're able.

I'm not arguing anymore, I'm helping.
He was asking me questions and I answered them.

I don't know what proof you're asking for.
If you understand logic then you've got all the "proof" you need in this thread.

Logic isn't on your side; you're wrong - it's not a matter of opinion, you're just outright WRONG.

Either "put up, or shut up."

Personally I'm strongly starting to think you're just trolling.

Troll of the day? This thread smells funny.

Oh, look, another glhf thread. Woot.

Let's count just how many self-contradictions and terribly insupportable and incorrect conclusions one poster can come to.

if you don't have a GDD that is highly details and formatted sortof like an archtecture plan for a building..
Then you're just building a game blindly and it could turn out in a catastrophe.. you might have to redo huge parts of the game or everything.
You might come up with new ideas in the middle of everything and will have to change everything. It could all fall apart.
You don't have a set goal, you don't know how much left there is to work on.. just guesses with all your ideas floating around in your mind and new ones appearing all the time and some you forget.. some simply don't mix well which you notice too late.
You could build a house without an architect plan but it's just not going to turn out as good.

I think it's ridiculous people expect the game designer to be doing something else AS WELL.. TWO JOBS and only get paid as 1 person.. Game designers that do more than game design should get double payment or share of revenue.
[/quote]
(I bolded the interesting parts, because what worth would an internet troll be if he didn't make sweeping statements that he later contradicts in the same thread?)

I gave everyone except Simon a thumb up..
I don't like his first point about not needing a GDD because he is the programmer and can do what he feels like.
[/quote]

Woot, personal attack via the rating system because someone disagreed. Classic troll move, well played.

And i mean I've already explained how hard it is to make a proper GDD.
Now multiply it by two times because you also have to design a great combat system for the game.
[/quote]

Wait, what? Why would the combat system multiply the difficulty of a "proper GDD" by two? Combat system should be inherently part of the "proper GDD".

I know that "The idea guy" isn't really a game designer.
But most people seem to think so and I see it posted as replies in almost all threads I see where someone tries to pitch a game concept to find a team.
[/quote]

Really, most people seem to think so? Where's the proof of this assertion? Dig up some links, man.

And you don't have to have completed games to be a game designer.. that's just so others can know you're good at designing games without looking at your GDD.
[/quote]

Yes, you need completed games to be a game designer. Otherwise, you're just a dabbler.

A GDD doesn't prove anything but neither does previous completed games. Previous completed games (good ones) says that you can create good game designs but doesn't prove your next one will be good.. Just increases the likelyhood. A GDD says a lot even if you don't have previous completed games.
[/quote]

A GDD is worth only as much as the actual game that is built upon it.

I also think game designer should have marketing in the game design too.. How will it be marketed? Published? competition? potential revenue? Also think they should design the website as well.
[/quote]

Ah, here we are. Yay for making the designer be a marketer and a web guy as well. That's 3 jobs in one. Hooray for self-contradiction.

the GDD is what tells how good the game will be.. and if a GDD causes 2 different teams to create compeltely different games then it was either a badly detailed GDD or the teams didn't follow the GDD correctly.
[/quote]

Nope, wrong. You can't measure fun by a GDD; you can only measure it by actual play.

You're saying the GDD doesn't say anything about how good the game will be but that's completely false.
[/quote]

But the replies all those threads are saying that game designers need to do a second job as well is just wrong.
[/quote]

Whoops, self-contradicting the self contradiction. Double troll points.

This is because game designers have a bad reputation because people don't understand the value of a game designer.
People always saying you can't just be the designer or idea person (which they think is same as designer(Proves so many devs are unaware of the designers value)).
[/quote]

Again, where's the proof that people don't understand the value of a game designer?

Did you ever stop to think that the reason most indys fail is because no one wants a game designer?
[/quote]

Blanket statements like this are why jbadams wants proof. The skilled troll will pull broad generalizations out of his ass, ignore requests for proof, and blithely point at all of his other posts as the proof being requested.

You all can keep on creating garbage indy games since you don't have any designers (since you dont understand their great value) in your games.
[/quote]

Yay, a collective personal attack. Skilled trolls will always try to antagonize as many people as possible in as efficient a manner as possible. Why waste energy on singling out one or two posters, when you can just insult the entire community. Double troll points.

If the game design is bad then it will need to be changed during development.. Or created if it's not very detailed.

I find it so extremely unprofessional for teams to completely change their game design in middle of development.
[/quote]

Yay, a self contradiction in the same post.

"dictatorial-style game-designer" as you put it is the way it should be..
[/quote]

rofl

I'm not arguing anymore, I'm helping.
[/quote]

This one I find particularly hilarious.

If I had to guess, glhf, the reason that game designers don't get respected in indy teams is because of people like you. Dictatorial game designers who think that everyone should follow their lead without questioning have no place in a team, be it indy or AAA.

If I had to guess, glhf, the reason that game designers don't get respected in indy teams is because of people like you. Dictatorial game designers who think that everyone should follow their lead without questioning have no place in a team, be it indy or AAA.

Jbadams says the word troll and all the trolls come running to this thread making completely unconstructive replies on this threads subject.

So mr shawn whats your reasoning for not agreeing with me?
I have already given a logical reason why dictatorial game designers are best and no one has counter argued it yet.

This thread is quite entertaining.

Question has been answered numerous times throughout as to why shitty designers get no respect.

Anyone with an idea calls themselves a "designer", it's harder to look at a designer and really know how good they are. They might fill out a Design doc template, is it good? Has anyone read every detail to know if it's good? They might have worked on lots of projects, but who knows how good their designs were? Maybe you put no thought into critical parts but it still looks ok from a glance. Maybe it could have been twice as good with a couple minor things you just didn't know about.

Really good design is complex and I don't even know all of what it encompasses. The more I hack my way through the process and learn, the more I understand how important a real designer is. Something as simple as layout of a level, if it splits in many directions, player will likely bypass a majority of your content and effort. Too linear and player doesn't feel "free". Just as an example. Having the player facing the direction they should go when they log in, using warm lighting to draw the player in a direction. But it's hard to tell if someone asking to be your designer is even aware of such minor details.

Also see the part out mouths to feed. A little success can be huge if there's only 1 mouth to feed.

Also imo gameplay improves by constant iteration. If I made everything as dry as the initial document without adjustments things would be terrible. That comes down to project management, scope creep, and having a process for updating/reviewing feasibility of changes to the design doc and making a yes or no decisions on what's worthwhile or not.