TLDR;
This GDC talk features five game designers discussing their personal game design rules. The key takeaway is that game design rules are not universal but personal, reflecting the creator's vision. The speakers emphasise understanding player emotions, embracing unconventional ideas, using psychological principles, focusing on small details, and avoiding self-evaluation in favour of playtesting and a clear design intent.
- Game design rules are personal, not universal.
- Understanding player emotions is crucial for system design.
- Inspiration can be found in unexpected places.
- Psychological principles can inform UI and game design.
- Small details can significantly impact player experience.
- Playtesting and a clear design intent are essential for evaluation.
Introduction [0:02]
Richard Rouse introduces the session, highlighting his fascination with game design rules and tradecraft. He notes that while many rules exist, often borrowed from other industries, the most valuable ones come from respected game designers. He quotes Sid Meier, Brenda Romero, and Will Wright, but questions the universality of these rules, suggesting they are personal and define a creator's style. The session will feature five speakers sharing their unique, personal rules for game design, encouraging the audience to compare these philosophies with their own.
Laurelyn McWills - Stress Emotional Connections at a Systemic Level [6:00]
Laurelyn McWills advocates for stressing emotional connections at a systemic level in game design. She argues that games should consider player emotions, not just character emotions, and create systems around them. McWills presents a "cheat sheet" that starts with human needs, then lists player interactions, and finally, explicitly lists player rewards, including emotional impact. She illustrates this with examples from Full Spectrum Warrior, where soldiers had personality and a system was implemented to prioritise healing shot soldiers, and Free Realms, where social needs were addressed by rewarding social interaction with appearance items.
Chris Avellone - Embracing Crap [16:54]
Chris Avellone discusses the importance of "embracing crap" or finding the silver lining in seemingly bad media. He shares examples of how he found inspiration in movies like I, Frankenstein, Cube, and even Twilight, as well as comics like The Elementals and Transmetropolitan. Avellone explains how these sources, despite their flaws, provided unique ideas for game mechanics, narrative design, and world-building in games like Planescape: Torment and Fallout: New Vegas. He encourages designers to look beyond the surface and find value in unexpected places.
Dan Teasdale - The Magic Number Three [27:48]
Dan Teasdale explores the "magic number three" and its basis in human psychology. He explains that short-term memory can hold only five to nine items, ideally organised into "chunks" of three. Teasdale demonstrates how this principle can be applied to UI design, using examples from Roundabout and The Gunstringer. He cautions against over applying the rule, noting that it's about perception and not necessarily about adjusting the behaviour of unperceivable elements.
Kim McAuliffe - Fight for the Little Things [36:46]
Kim McAuliffe emphasises the importance of fighting for the "little things" in game development, as they can have a surprisingly big impact on players and the development team. She uses examples from her work on The Sims 2 for Nintendo DS, where adding cow tipping and chocolate milkshakes led to unexpected player engagement and later inspired features in The Sims 3. She also discusses Kinect TV, where fighting for a voting system that allowed the whole family to participate improved the player experience. McAuliffe highlights how these small details can create social currency, leading to positive word-of-mouth and game success.
Nells Anderson - Don't Try to Evaluate Your Own Game [50:10]
Nells Anderson argues that designers should not try to evaluate their own games due to their inherent bias. He stresses the importance of playtesting and observing player behaviour to identify problems, rather than listening to player-suggested solutions. Anderson emphasises the need for a clear "design intent" for each game element, allowing for focused evaluation during playtesting. He contrasts this with the concept of a "minimum viable product" (MVP), which he criticises for lacking vision and leading to generic, uninspired games. He concludes by advising designers to focus on creating unique, compelling experiences and to listen for problems, not just solutions, during playtesting.
