Nine Commandments of Good Video Game Design
To all video game developers out there (publishers too), here are some essential dos and don'ts from a humble gamer.
Thou Shalt Use Thy Medium of Video Game to Tell Thy Story or Narrative. Novels are best when they are novels, films are best when they are films, and video games are best when they are games. When video games attempt to be something else, something they are not, they steal elements established by other mediums. This is bad, why? Because a video game naturally excels and exploits narrative techniques and story telling mechanics that are best tied to video games. Even subtle elements, like how much life a player has, or what kind of weapons players use, and on whom they use them, effectively communicate elements of the video games narrative, feeling, or story in a way no other medium can do as well. The same is true for every medium: books are great at using thought narration, but films less so?as they are more visual. So, the same reasoning applies to video games. While video games may share many elements associated with films or books, over using those techniques in a game detracts from the player experience, because it is not the medium in which the user is expected to react?he or she isn't reading, or watching, they are supposed to be playing as the primary mode of interaction. And when a game is using excessive cut-scenes, ?cinematic? effects, or copious amounts of player down-time to tell a story, a video game is failing this commandment.
Thou Shalt Not Use Unsubstantial Gameplay. What is Unsubstantial Gameplay you ask? Oh, well have you ever played a quick time event in game? So, what effect did that have on you, the player? Probably not anything significant, or at the very least the emotional state of annoyance. Why? Because ?press X not to die? moments carry no relevance into the game world. The connection one feels when pressing a simon-says button sequence in cut-scenes (essentially a pre-recorded film), is just the feeling that game creators are giving the player a basic pulse check. And now I can't leave and go make a sandwich during your boring cut-scene. But, game-makers shouldn't need to do pulse checks if the game is engaging in the first place. You see ?pressing X not to die? has no relevance to the game world in most cases?it effects gameplay only in that you don't die. Which is wonderful, but engagement is only one part of the equation of a good game mechanic?the other part is its substantial-ness, or the meaning it gives the player to perform such an action in the game world. Game actions should have meaning (much unlike real life, but life is a very unfair game, with very bad balancing and strange game mechanics).
Thou Shalt Not Fall In With Any Other Aesthetic That is Not Primarily A Video Game Aesthetic. When Mr. Cage mathematically measures the emotional progression of video gaming over the years, one gets the feeling that his formula for emotion is driven by graphical fidelity. Why all the maths in the world can't explain why I cry at the end of Super Metriod, a technically inferior game on the emotionally mathematic pixel per inch equation of emotion formula, which is still a mystery for Mr. Cage to explain. But, video games should never be held hostage to reality. Because reality is limited, and sometimes very lame. Nor should they follow the look of film. Video games like all art, have their own specific artistic aesthetic?and as we approach the ability to make them look like films?this is vital to remember. Take for example Hotline Miami, which retains a deliberate pixeliation, calling back to video game past. However, take a closer look at those pixeled polygons and you may notice them rotation or gliding, which means that there are many smaller pixels helping it give the appearance of a floaty cocaine infused large pixel animation. This is a deliberate use of video game aesthetics, a new form of artistic experience almost entirely unique to digital art (like games). There are many ways this new aesthetic can be explored, not that there is anything wrong with graphical fidelity, it just isn't as expressively unique or compelling, or following this commandment you heathen!
Thou Shalt Foremost Value Gameplay, Always! What about the story you ask? Good question. Do you remember the days of yore (early 90s) when PC adventure games where thy shit? Well if you do, you'll remember that while the stories where top-notch, the gameplay was nothing more than rubbing your items on every interesting looking thing and person till something happened. This is why the genre failed, because it let its gameplay stagnate instead of inform its story telling abilities. This is also why many grand-strategy games find success when executed well, even though they lack a story in a ?traditional? sense. Are you seeing the crux at hand here? Gameplay always informs story first. If you have good gameplay, you've got the basis for a good story that builds upon those in-game elements. It's also a yin and yang, you certainly can't have one without the other, but solid gameplay is needed to make a good story happen, and while a grounded and thought-out story is needed to inform the gameplay in some cases, most of the time gameplay does the legwork first and foremost. So, when in doubt: always let the game tell the story. Addendum: note that some games may not have a story or plot in a ?traditional? sense; consider Crusader Kings II, this game's great gameplay informs a story that is user made and imaginative, so this ruling still works in this case.
Thou Shalt Not Commit The Sin of Graphic Gluttony. While pretty little golden pixels, particle effects, and anti-aliasing whatever-you-call-it may be thy shit of the day?if that is all a game has going for it, then just think how ridiculous it'll sound and look to players a decade from its release date. Save the graphic boners for graphics teams and the digital animation professionals, you can make the best games on the cheap end of the graphic look. You may even find a new aesthetic or cool art style. Chasing the dream of graphic fidelity is a hardware nuts wet-dream, and it is a shallow desire, that has the added effect of reducing an audience as well. We raise ourselves to a higher standard, and will create longer lasting games with this outlook. And for all you gamers out there: let the graphics arms race end, and let the artistic and gameplay race hit its stride. Thus the success of the indie market.
Thou Shalt Not Be Elitist. No one likes a snob, and there's nothing wrong with the word ?casual? either. After all ?casual? is a very relaxing word, it sounds unburden-some. Let video game culture be a culture of free love, and peace; let bygones be bygones. Do not attack other players or those who play certain kinds of games just to cause yourself an underserved sense of satisfaction. Those who know they have the best game need not speak it (such things are PREFRENCES anyway you dip-s***). And certainly don't make a game with a snobbish attitude either. Your game should have nothing to teach or preach, nothing to spread to the unwashed masses, no overly complicated functions for the sake of weaning out the ?noobs?. Because everyone will have to be a noob at one point, so let your ill-founded resentments go if you have any. Maybe seek psychological help before you make that game. Also make sure you have proper ways for new-players to learn a game slowly, at their own pace.
Thou Shalt Teach Thy Player How to Play With More Gameplay. You don't have to pretend your new players are utter morons. I mean you inevitably have a few, but help guides will always arrive online or on forums for in-depth guidance. So this means for most games you shouldn't need that overly ho-hum tutorial. Players can watch and learn from playing the game. Older games did this plenty, often times having other in-game characters show the player via in-game action (not text or speech) what they (the player) could potentially do. Also you can assume that your players will naturally experiment and figure shit out through the natural course of gameplay. Many players skip the tutorial levels anyways (I often do). Good gameplay naturally progresses (gets slowly more difficult) and educates the player in-game over time. This is exactly the target you want to aim for, use events and in-game mechanics to show the player what they can do, because tutorials are lame... and we all know it. It's similar to creative writing where ?showing? is better than ?telling?. And besides, why can't we have fun and learn at the same time? Grade school teachers shouldn't be better at answering this question.
Thou Shalt Not Abuse Thy Player. Sorry, this one should be unbelievably obvious?and you better believe it. However, in the wake of recent anti-consumer marketing gambits from certain companies (which forgot that treading on consumers when your goal is to sell something to them is suicidal from a business perspective, here's looking at you Xbone), it would seem pertinent to stress this in these commandments. All games should value the end-user's time, money, and respect their decisions. This includes not cheating the player out of money with tricky payment schemes. Games that make obsessive use of in-game stores or online passes degrade the overall game experience, and stand as testimonials to corporatism dominating art?which doesn?t speak well for the new medium trying to find its way into the artistic and cultural world. Remember that each player is an investment, while it may seem profitable to think short term and get their immediate money, thinking long term is a better, longer, and more satisfying relationship. Let the player learn to like your game for what it really is?a fun and interesting game, and the player will likely talk to his friends about it, post online about said game, develop a community surrounding it with natural promotion, and support further games made by the developers. By letting in a natural community of criticism and evaluation, video games stand to become respected works of art. After all, what makes Shakespeare a real Shakespeare is his community of English majors who write papers, develop criticism or praise, and generally just talk about his work; don't forget that. A game is nothing without a player.
Thou Shalt Seek Originality. Many before you have established game conventions and tropes that we, as gamers, have experienced time and time again. Try something new. Does every game have to have an escort mission? Does every game have to fall into some anachronistic category or be a hybrid of those established genres? Remember that players established those play-genres (FPS, RPG, RTS, etc), because it made it easier to describe the type of gameplay, but really they shouldn't be used to limit developers, or lock them down. Build the game, let us players figure out what to call it later. Remember that in an artistic realm nothing is worse than banality and mediocrity?and from a business perspective it doesn?t make sense either. If we have a dozen different Call of Duty clones on the market, are you really going to try and sell a product to people that already have it, if you are, don't expect it to be the next ?big? thing in gaming. So, explore new narratives that only video games can do, establish new conventions that come from the video game way of player interactivity. Take inspiration from multiple sources, and do something that maybe can't be done in a book, or on the big screen. Because the reality is: video games have only just begone to scratch the surface of interactive art.
To all video game developers out there (publishers too), here are some essential dos and don'ts from a humble gamer.
Thou Shalt Use Thy Medium of Video Game to Tell Thy Story or Narrative. Novels are best when they are novels, films are best when they are films, and video games are best when they are games. When video games attempt to be something else, something they are not, they steal elements established by other mediums. This is bad, why? Because a video game naturally excels and exploits narrative techniques and story telling mechanics that are best tied to video games. Even subtle elements, like how much life a player has, or what kind of weapons players use, and on whom they use them, effectively communicate elements of the video games narrative, feeling, or story in a way no other medium can do as well. The same is true for every medium: books are great at using thought narration, but films less so?as they are more visual. So, the same reasoning applies to video games. While video games may share many elements associated with films or books, over using those techniques in a game detracts from the player experience, because it is not the medium in which the user is expected to react?he or she isn't reading, or watching, they are supposed to be playing as the primary mode of interaction. And when a game is using excessive cut-scenes, ?cinematic? effects, or copious amounts of player down-time to tell a story, a video game is failing this commandment.
Thou Shalt Not Use Unsubstantial Gameplay. What is Unsubstantial Gameplay you ask? Oh, well have you ever played a quick time event in game? So, what effect did that have on you, the player? Probably not anything significant, or at the very least the emotional state of annoyance. Why? Because ?press X not to die? moments carry no relevance into the game world. The connection one feels when pressing a simon-says button sequence in cut-scenes (essentially a pre-recorded film), is just the feeling that game creators are giving the player a basic pulse check. And now I can't leave and go make a sandwich during your boring cut-scene. But, game-makers shouldn't need to do pulse checks if the game is engaging in the first place. You see ?pressing X not to die? has no relevance to the game world in most cases?it effects gameplay only in that you don't die. Which is wonderful, but engagement is only one part of the equation of a good game mechanic?the other part is its substantial-ness, or the meaning it gives the player to perform such an action in the game world. Game actions should have meaning (much unlike real life, but life is a very unfair game, with very bad balancing and strange game mechanics).
Thou Shalt Not Fall In With Any Other Aesthetic That is Not Primarily A Video Game Aesthetic. When Mr. Cage mathematically measures the emotional progression of video gaming over the years, one gets the feeling that his formula for emotion is driven by graphical fidelity. Why all the maths in the world can't explain why I cry at the end of Super Metriod, a technically inferior game on the emotionally mathematic pixel per inch equation of emotion formula, which is still a mystery for Mr. Cage to explain. But, video games should never be held hostage to reality. Because reality is limited, and sometimes very lame. Nor should they follow the look of film. Video games like all art, have their own specific artistic aesthetic?and as we approach the ability to make them look like films?this is vital to remember. Take for example Hotline Miami, which retains a deliberate pixeliation, calling back to video game past. However, take a closer look at those pixeled polygons and you may notice them rotation or gliding, which means that there are many smaller pixels helping it give the appearance of a floaty cocaine infused large pixel animation. This is a deliberate use of video game aesthetics, a new form of artistic experience almost entirely unique to digital art (like games). There are many ways this new aesthetic can be explored, not that there is anything wrong with graphical fidelity, it just isn't as expressively unique or compelling, or following this commandment you heathen!
Thou Shalt Foremost Value Gameplay, Always! What about the story you ask? Good question. Do you remember the days of yore (early 90s) when PC adventure games where thy shit? Well if you do, you'll remember that while the stories where top-notch, the gameplay was nothing more than rubbing your items on every interesting looking thing and person till something happened. This is why the genre failed, because it let its gameplay stagnate instead of inform its story telling abilities. This is also why many grand-strategy games find success when executed well, even though they lack a story in a ?traditional? sense. Are you seeing the crux at hand here? Gameplay always informs story first. If you have good gameplay, you've got the basis for a good story that builds upon those in-game elements. It's also a yin and yang, you certainly can't have one without the other, but solid gameplay is needed to make a good story happen, and while a grounded and thought-out story is needed to inform the gameplay in some cases, most of the time gameplay does the legwork first and foremost. So, when in doubt: always let the game tell the story. Addendum: note that some games may not have a story or plot in a ?traditional? sense; consider Crusader Kings II, this game's great gameplay informs a story that is user made and imaginative, so this ruling still works in this case.
Thou Shalt Not Commit The Sin of Graphic Gluttony. While pretty little golden pixels, particle effects, and anti-aliasing whatever-you-call-it may be thy shit of the day?if that is all a game has going for it, then just think how ridiculous it'll sound and look to players a decade from its release date. Save the graphic boners for graphics teams and the digital animation professionals, you can make the best games on the cheap end of the graphic look. You may even find a new aesthetic or cool art style. Chasing the dream of graphic fidelity is a hardware nuts wet-dream, and it is a shallow desire, that has the added effect of reducing an audience as well. We raise ourselves to a higher standard, and will create longer lasting games with this outlook. And for all you gamers out there: let the graphics arms race end, and let the artistic and gameplay race hit its stride. Thus the success of the indie market.
Thou Shalt Not Be Elitist. No one likes a snob, and there's nothing wrong with the word ?casual? either. After all ?casual? is a very relaxing word, it sounds unburden-some. Let video game culture be a culture of free love, and peace; let bygones be bygones. Do not attack other players or those who play certain kinds of games just to cause yourself an underserved sense of satisfaction. Those who know they have the best game need not speak it (such things are PREFRENCES anyway you dip-s***). And certainly don't make a game with a snobbish attitude either. Your game should have nothing to teach or preach, nothing to spread to the unwashed masses, no overly complicated functions for the sake of weaning out the ?noobs?. Because everyone will have to be a noob at one point, so let your ill-founded resentments go if you have any. Maybe seek psychological help before you make that game. Also make sure you have proper ways for new-players to learn a game slowly, at their own pace.
Thou Shalt Teach Thy Player How to Play With More Gameplay. You don't have to pretend your new players are utter morons. I mean you inevitably have a few, but help guides will always arrive online or on forums for in-depth guidance. So this means for most games you shouldn't need that overly ho-hum tutorial. Players can watch and learn from playing the game. Older games did this plenty, often times having other in-game characters show the player via in-game action (not text or speech) what they (the player) could potentially do. Also you can assume that your players will naturally experiment and figure shit out through the natural course of gameplay. Many players skip the tutorial levels anyways (I often do). Good gameplay naturally progresses (gets slowly more difficult) and educates the player in-game over time. This is exactly the target you want to aim for, use events and in-game mechanics to show the player what they can do, because tutorials are lame... and we all know it. It's similar to creative writing where ?showing? is better than ?telling?. And besides, why can't we have fun and learn at the same time? Grade school teachers shouldn't be better at answering this question.
Thou Shalt Not Abuse Thy Player. Sorry, this one should be unbelievably obvious?and you better believe it. However, in the wake of recent anti-consumer marketing gambits from certain companies (which forgot that treading on consumers when your goal is to sell something to them is suicidal from a business perspective, here's looking at you Xbone), it would seem pertinent to stress this in these commandments. All games should value the end-user's time, money, and respect their decisions. This includes not cheating the player out of money with tricky payment schemes. Games that make obsessive use of in-game stores or online passes degrade the overall game experience, and stand as testimonials to corporatism dominating art?which doesn?t speak well for the new medium trying to find its way into the artistic and cultural world. Remember that each player is an investment, while it may seem profitable to think short term and get their immediate money, thinking long term is a better, longer, and more satisfying relationship. Let the player learn to like your game for what it really is?a fun and interesting game, and the player will likely talk to his friends about it, post online about said game, develop a community surrounding it with natural promotion, and support further games made by the developers. By letting in a natural community of criticism and evaluation, video games stand to become respected works of art. After all, what makes Shakespeare a real Shakespeare is his community of English majors who write papers, develop criticism or praise, and generally just talk about his work; don't forget that. A game is nothing without a player.
Thou Shalt Seek Originality. Many before you have established game conventions and tropes that we, as gamers, have experienced time and time again. Try something new. Does every game have to have an escort mission? Does every game have to fall into some anachronistic category or be a hybrid of those established genres? Remember that players established those play-genres (FPS, RPG, RTS, etc), because it made it easier to describe the type of gameplay, but really they shouldn't be used to limit developers, or lock them down. Build the game, let us players figure out what to call it later. Remember that in an artistic realm nothing is worse than banality and mediocrity?and from a business perspective it doesn?t make sense either. If we have a dozen different Call of Duty clones on the market, are you really going to try and sell a product to people that already have it, if you are, don't expect it to be the next ?big? thing in gaming. So, explore new narratives that only video games can do, establish new conventions that come from the video game way of player interactivity. Take inspiration from multiple sources, and do something that maybe can't be done in a book, or on the big screen. Because the reality is: video games have only just begone to scratch the surface of interactive art.
