100 replies to this topic

[jbadams]

Its not a fact.

Find me a single example to the contrary, or a link where an experienced professional provides an example. Just one. If you're not wrong, step up and provide examples that supports what you're saying.


Remember, all I'm saying is that designs change during development.

This is a fact, and I'm not sure why you're so persistent in trying to disagree with it, especially given it's a fact that doesn't actually diminish the point you were originally trying to make. Designers are more valuable because it's true, and would be less important if they were no longer needed after writing a GDD.


EDIT:
It strikes me that it's rather unfair of me to demand you to provide examples without providing some of my own. I did already provide the example of Quake, but you've dismissed that, and whilst I disagree with your reasons it's a rather easy matter to provide more examples, so I won't argue the point.

Firstly we'll start with a little anecdotal support from right here in the topic:

• In reply #36, Hodgman is talking about his own industry experience, and mentions that "no-one uses the waterfall model where the product matches your very first plan".
• In numerous replies, SimonForsman tells mentions that it is true for his own experiences as a hobbyist developer.

But those are just people responding to this topic... what about some well respected professionals...?

• In his article on Game Design Logs, successful indie developer and experienced industry veteran Daniel Cook recommends an alternative to traditional game design documents, and says that "game design is a process of informed iteration, not a fixed engineering plan that you implement" and that "it is an essential quality of a game design that it evolves over time."
• In his article "why you should share your game designs", the same writer (Daniel Cook) says that "the final game is not going to look anything like your initial game design because ultimately it is the game director who makes the most important decisions, not the person who writes the game design document."
• In his article Why Design Documents Matter, experienced developer Ernest W. Adams (who lists his experience as "23 years as a design consultant, lead designer, producer, and software engineer in the game industry, following 7 years as an engineer in the CAD industry.") says that "video game design is a highly collaborative activity, far more so than the movies. Unlike a film director, whose rule is well-nigh absolute, few designers are allowed total control over their game."
• Halo developer Bungie are well known for their idea of finding "15 seconds of fun" and then making it repeatable by iterating on their design. You can see them talk about this in the documentary on the special features disk, or read about it in many articles online (such as this one).

Now, remembering that earlier in the topic I did allow for the idea that some games stick to an up-front design, and given all these examples, are you willing to concede that you were wrong and that in the majority of cases a design will change during development, or are you going to provide some examples to the contrary?

Game designs change during development. It's just the way things are. The fact that it's like that actually supports your original idea, so I've no idea why you're so insistent in arguing against it. Go on -- admit you were wrong and move on -- you just might grow as a person and learn something.

[Ashaman73]

To be honest, it seems that you have some game design in mind and that you want to realise it, but on the other hand you seem to be frustrated or afraid that nobody will work with you, because you lack the skills a typical indie developer team expected (mostly coder/artist).

The latter will not change, even when you try to convince us all that this is unfair, but this is the current state of indie/hobby dev teams which has nothing to do with respect.

Instead try to think about ways to convice a potential team to work with you.

[Acharis]

A designer that knows neither programming nor art is not a designer, but a lazy bum. Yes, there are 100% full time designers, but they are those designers only because in the past they were programmers/artist/whatever and learned how to make games. If you just start and never make any games before and don't have any skills except "awesome ideas" you are lazy. Lazy, lazy, lazy. Because if you were serious about game design you would learn some additional skill, even if only for the purpose of better understanding the people you going to work with (besides, I find it wery weird if a designer is unable to make even a primitive prototype in some simple language so the rest the of team can see it).

This is especially critical for indie teams, because no one can afford to make 1/5 of their 5 people team designers who don't make any final work. If there is 20-30 team people, why not, they might be ablo to affort 1 full time designer. But for a small team it is simply not possible.

[glhf]

Well, I'm done arguing.
All I wanted was to get a glimpse into the minds of why no one likes game design in indy.

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.
That's fine by me, Less competition

[Legendre]

The GDD must be made so that the developers will have zero questions about what to do.
The artists shouldn't have to ask you how big an image should be.

So "the idea person" or rather the game designer an has insane amount of work.. He just does most of it before a dev team begins working on it.

I am not sure if this is possible. For example, my indy project is always in a constant state of flux. Examples of the changes that had to be made:

1) Started writing it in Java, switched to PHP/MySQL.
2) Game started as a collectible card game with RPG elements. The collectible card game aspect has been abandoned after play test and it is now an RPG.
3) Features had to be scale down to a level that a lone programmer (me) can finish in reasonable time.
4) Layout of the website had to be modified several times to accommodate new or scrapped features.

There were many more. I don't see how a project can remain constant from start to finish. Sometimes things don't work in when I actually program and/or play test them. Sometimes, new features can be incorporated as you learn more about the technology. E.g. I didn't know I can use AJAX to dynamically check availability of username in in registration form until I started coding.

Also, when I hire artists to produce the art, I find it impossible to tell them exactly how to draw. The best I can do is to produce a style guide and get future artists to try and keep his style similar to the guide. Even the artists I hire to piece together the style guide bring their own touches to the art style. Often, I would find the artists' input to be superior to what I envisioned.

[glhf]

The GDD must be made so that the developers will have zero questions about what to do.
The artists shouldn't have to ask you how big an image should be.

So "the idea person" or rather the game designer an has insane amount of work.. He just does most of it before a dev team begins working on it.

I am not sure if this is possible. For example, my indy project is always in a constant state of flux. Examples of the changes that had to be made:

1) Started writing it in Java, switched to PHP/MySQL.
2) Game started as a collectible card game with RPG elements. The collectible card game aspect has been abandoned after play test and it is now an RPG.
3) Features had to be scale down to a level that a lone programmer (me) can finish in reasonable time.
4) Layout of the website had to be modified several times to accommodate new or scrapped features.

There were many more. I don't see how a project can remain constant from start to finish. Sometimes things don't work in when I actually program and/or play test them. Sometimes, new features can be incorporated as you learn more about the technology. E.g. I didn't know I can use AJAX to dynamically check availability of username in in registration form until I started coding.

Also, when I hire artists to produce the art, I find it impossible to tell them exactly how to draw. The best I can do is to produce a style guide and get future artists to try and keep his style similar to the guide. Even the artists I hire to piece together the style guide bring their own touches to the art style. Often, I would find the artists' input to be superior to what I envisioned.

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.

[jbadams]

Interesting that you'll argue for two pages and then announce that you're leaving as soon as someone asks you to back up what you're saying.

That's where the designers skill come in play.
If the game design is bad then it will need to be changed during development.

Get a grip on reality.

[Tiblanc]

You obviously didn't read the thread or even the OP.
Idea is just the 1% of the game designers process.
So what if the programmer has ideas too, You can't build a game efficiently on just an idea.. if you do then it can turn out to be anything.

You also don't understand the value of a game designer still.
Personally I would rather have a great game designer instead of a great artist in my team.

The game designer creates great gameplay while the artist just creates... eye candy.. makes the game more pleasant to look at.

And programmer? Well obviously it gets preferred over the designer since there's no game without a programmer.
But a programmer just puts the blocks ontop of each other.. builds code.

It's the designers job to tell him where to place the blocks so it becomes a great and fun game.

Completely insulting the people with the skills to bring an idea to reality is a sure way to never get anyone working with you.

There is a big logic issue here. You assume someone with a given skill will necessarily be worse at other things than someone else without that skill. Thinking that because you can't program or draw must necessarily mean you are better at game design is completely false.

[JTippetts]

glhf, why do you always insist on taking it personally when nobody agrees with you? You have unrealistic expectations, and any time you are challenged on them you get angry and begin with the personal attacks. You are obviously wanting to fill the role of dictatorial-style game-designer that you so fervently argue for, and it seems like you want us all to collectively agree with your crap, and start hiring you on so you can be an idea man without doing an ounce of real work. Sorry if the world doesn't bend to your childish tantrums and unrealistic fantasies.

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.

That's fine by me, Less competition

Best of luck being the guy with no competetion when you continually antagonize the people who have the skills that you need, the skills to actually make a video game (as opposed to just having an idea).

[glhf]

glhf, why do you always insist on taking it personally when nobody agrees with you? You have unrealistic expectations, and any time you are challenged on them you get angry and begin with the personal attacks. You are obviously wanting to fill the role of dictatorial-style game-designer that you so fervently argue for, and it seems like you want us all to collectively agree with your crap, and start hiring you on so you can be an idea man without doing an ounce of real work. Sorry if the world doesn't bend to your childish tantrums and unrealistic fantasies.

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.

That's fine by me, Less competition

Best of luck being the guy with no competetion when you continually antagonize the people who have the skills that you need, the skills to actually make a video game (as opposed to just having an idea).

You are funny, You are the one who started the personal insults to me in another thread and now you're doing it again.
I'm not here to look for a team, I'm here to research, collect info and debate.. although debating seems kind of meaningless.. it never leads anywhere.

"dictatorial-style game-designer" as you put it is the way it should be..
Want to know why? Read the thread.

And do you think I would want a dev in my team who doesn't agree with me anyway?
What a failure team that would be if everyone in the team has different opinions and want different things and don't understand each other.

[Legendre]

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?

[glhf]

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?

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.

[jbadams]

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.

[glhf]

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.

[jbadams]

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.

[Madhed]

Troll of the day? This thread smells funny.

[FLeBlanc]

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.

(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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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)).

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?

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.

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.

Yay, a self contradiction in the same post.

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

rofl

I'm not arguing anymore, I'm helping.

This one I find particularly hilarious.

[ShawnCowles]

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.

[glhf]

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.

[lmbarns]

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.