Game Design Tools and Vocabulary

 During the third week of lectures we were given readings to better understand and analyse - Extracts from a Doug Church article as well as a chapter to read from the course text - Challenges for Game Designers by Brenda Brathwaite and Ian Schreiber. This chapter shows how a game can be broken up into many tiny areas, hence the simple title: Atoms.

"In short, we need a shared language of game design."

- Doug Church (1999:1)

So let me begin by stating that Doug Church really emphasises the lack of technical and precise language used within the games industry, specifically in the design of objects and assets areas. Church expresses his desire for a for a structured framework for a vocabulary around the basis of designing games. Assets of games design are constantly analysed, however there is very little information for a designer to realise what they have done wrong and how to rectify it. Of course a very basic idea of the problem is presented when people say a game is "cool" or "fun", but what exactly constitute 'cool' or 'fun'? There is not a strong enough amount of detail for the designer to set it straight - which is where Church's proposed system comes in:

Church developed a framework called Formal Abstract Design Tools (FADT). In simple terms:

Formal 

- Criticise and define items and be able to explain them to others.

Abstract 

- To explain new and fresh ideas around the entire subject.

Design 

- We are Games Designers, so design is rather a large aspect...

Tools 

- Involved in the very framework we want to create.

The first tools that Church explains in depth are intention and perceivable consequence:


Intention - "Making an implementable plan of one's own creation in response to the current situation in the game world and one's understanding of the game play options." 

- (Doug Church 1999:4)

Perceivable Consequence -  "A clear reaction from the game world to the action of the player."

                                                                                  - (Doug Church 1999:4)

Put simply, intention helps the player to feel as though they are progressing by acting on their own plans as they see fit inside the game world. Perceivable consequences allow the player to assess the situation they are in, ensuring they learn from their mistakes and never feel 'cheated' by the game.


Reading this article has further proven that using a clear design vocabulary is as important as breathing. Church's tools and vocabulary accurately reflect my feelings (from a user's point of view), no one wants to feel 'cheated' by any game - if you die from choosing to go down one path instead of the other, you don't expect to succeed by repeating the process. You can clearly see the wrong choice that was made, and learn to avoid it.


The chapters from Challenges for Games Designers broke down game design tools and vocabulary into even smaller 'atoms'! However, this chapter creates many more small design tools that are crucial to design, aspects involved in intention and perceivable consequence perhaps? Let's take a look at these tools:

Game State

- One large collection of all the relevant game data that could change during play. This extract gives Poker as an example; the game state would be each of the player's hands and chips, the pot size, who's turn it is, who has folded on the current hand, which cards are in the deck and in what order. Put simply this is every aspect the game requires to operate smoothly and as desired.

Game View 

- The areas of the game that the user can see and interact with. For example in a game of chess, the game view would be the board, the pieces, and that is all! None of the information is concealed from the user. However in a game like Battleships, the game view is rather different.

Game Space 

- This is the whole area of the game in general. 

Avatar

- This is the digital projection of the player.

Game Bits 

- This involves all the game pieces - such as cards, dice, counters etc. All the physical objects that must be included to make up the finished game.

Game Mechanics 

- In order for the game to operate smoothly, game mechanics are required. The game rules and how the player interacts with those rules to fulfill the objective. For example during snakes and ladders when you land on a snake, you must go to the bottom of the snake, with no exceptions.

Game Dynamics 

- This is the pattern of play that occurs after the game mechanics have been implemented. For example, a game such as Risk is highly involved with territorial acquisition.

Goals 

- A lot of games have one, ultimate goal (to win!). However some games have multiple smaller goals used to immerse the player into the game world (e.g kill X of this creature, run from here to there etc.), often resulting in rewards.

Theme

- This is a massively general definition for 'What is the game about?' For example: Chess is about you, the commander of an army, destroying enemy armies. Snakes and Ladders is about who can reach square one hundred first.

Both of these articles are an in depth attempt at creating a more structured game design vocabulary, something that everyone can use and understand universally. Church, Braithwaite and Schreiber have all attempted to create this new vocabulary, but only one can reign supreme. In my own opinion I believe that, when compared to Doug Church, Braithwaite and Schreiber have created something much closer to a consistant and correct vocabulary for games design. They are both straight to the point, easy to read and understand, and have covered each aspect of games design in a precise and in depth analysis providing us with a much more versatile vocabulary towards games design.


Live long, and play games.