Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#ActualLegendre

Posted 28 January 2013 - 05:50 PM

In my humble opinion, "design vs development" is quite a false dichotomy. The actual process is more like this...

Step 1 - Ideas Generation

This is the "fun'' part of making games. Often mistaken for "design" (Tom Sloper Lesson 14). I dream of different game ideas, stories and mechanics. I used to write a lot of details out on paper but don't do it anymore because I keep having to make major changes or drop nonviable ideas.

Step 2 - Prototype

This is one of the "hard" parts. I pick an idea from step 1 and test/prototype to see if it is viable or works like I imagined. I had to go back to step 1 several times when my idea turned out to be not viable or not what I expected (which is why I stopped wasting too much time writing extensive details in step 1 without testing). The prototypes/tests are never "playable demos". They are often not playable implementations for my own use only.

Step 3 - Develop

Step 2 tests which ideas are viable and which technologies (programming languages, engines etc) to use. Once that is done, its time to actually make the game. This is another one of the "hard" parts.

Sometimes I have to do "heavy" development. E.g. I recently had to write a node.js web server from scratch for my multiplayer game. But this is always done with the design of the game in mind. There is no "generic" web server or engine that programmers churn out from a fixed blue print. The design is deeply intertwined with the programming. After that, I switch to developing the client-side or "front-end" while at the same time, adding complementary features to the server-side or "back-end". Once again, the game's design is so deeply intertwined with this process: I have to test what works and what is doable, then edit my game's mechanics and story accordingly.

Conclusion

Each of the 3 steps both requires "design" and is influence by "design". I am not sure if it is possible to separate "design" out into a standalone activity.

#1Legendre

Posted 28 January 2013 - 05:45 PM

In my humble opinion, "design vs development" is quite a false dichotomy. The actual process is more like this...

 

Step 1 - Ideas Generation

 

This is the "fun'' part of making games. Often mistaken for "design" (Tom Sloper Lesson 14). I dream of different game ideas, stories and mechanics. I used to write a lot of details out on paper but don't do it anymore because I keep having to make major changes or drop nonviable designs.

 

Step 2 - Prototype

 

This is one of the "hard" parts. I pick an idea from step 1 and test/prototype to see if it is viable or works like I imagined. I had to go back to step 1 several times when my idea turned out to be not viable or not what I expected (which is why I stopped wasting too much time writing extensive details in step 1 without testing). The prototypes/tests are never "playable demos". They are often not playable implementations for my own use only.

 

Step 3 - Develop

 

Step 2 tests which ideas are viable and which technologies (programming languages, engines etc) to use. Once that is done, its time to actually make the game. This is another one of the "hard" parts.

 

Sometimes I have to do "heavy" development. E.g. I recently had to write a node.js web server from scratch for my multiplayer game. But this is always done with the design of the game in mind. There is no "generic" web server or engine that programmers churn out from a fixed blue print. The design is deeply intertwined with the programming. After that, I switch to developing the client-side or "front-end" while at the same time, adding complementary features to the server-side or "back-end". Once again, the game's design is so deeply intertwined with this process: I have to test what works and what is doable, then edit my game's mechanics and story accordingly.

 

Conclusion

 

Each of the 3 steps both requires "design" and is influence by "design". I am not sure if it is possible to separate "design" out into a standalone activity.


PARTNERS