Your Three Golden Gates of Game Design

[FireLance]

Someone once said that before you say anything (or, I would assume, post anything to a messageboard ), what you say ought to pass through the following three gates. At the first, you ask, "Is it true?" At the second, you ask, "Is it needful?" At the third, you ask, "Is it kind?"

You could apply the same approach to game design. My three gates (for now ) would be: "Is it balanced?" "Is it plausible?" and "Is it interesting?"

What would yours be?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Is it as simple as it can be?
Is it as detailed as it needs to be?
Is it as fun as it should be?

(not in order of importance)

 

[Tony Vargas]

Someone once said that before you say anything (or, I would assume, post anything to a messageboard ), what you say ought to pass through the following three gates. At the first, you ask, "Is it true?" At the second, you ask, "Is it needful?" At the third, you ask, "Is it kind?"

Heh. If both sides did that, you couldn't even have an edition war.

You could apply the same approach to game design. My three gates (for now ) would be: "Is it balanced?" "Is it plausible?" and "Is it interesting?"

What would yours be?

I think I'd go with 'unique,' 'consistent,' and 'balanced.'

• Does the new element add something genuinely new to the game (rather than just re-hash or obviate or be strictly inferior to some existing element)?
• is it consistent with what the game tries to do (a laser pistol would be a unique thing to add to a fantasy game, but it doesn't really belong in one)?
• is it a meaningful, viable choice compared to existing choices (or is it too good - power inflation - or not good enough)?

 

[n00bdragon]

Is it simple? - Almost all game actions should be easy to resolve and clear in their effect and resolution.
Is it balanced? - Everyone should have the same opportunity to contribute.
Is it fun? - Obviously the most important gate. A game should always be entertaining.

 

[Cadfan]

What is the goal?
Does it achieve it?
Could it achieve it with less?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

"What is it supposed to accomplish?"
"Does it accomplish it with only the necessary amount of complexity?"
"Does it accomplish it in a way that fits the flavor of the game?"

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Gilberto3
has no status.

Registered User



Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 7
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[LostSoul]

Do players have meaningful choices to make? (Balance)
Does the fictional content of those choices have weight in the game? (Currency)
Do the choices the players make gain depth as the game is played? (Reward System)

 

[Tallifer]

Very interesting food for thought...

1. Is it elegant and clear? Can I read the rules in an evening and understand the basic mechanics which will then be applied to everything else?

2. Does it allow for a great variety of settings, characters and stories?

3. This last requirement casts a wide net. Does it evoke an interesting atmosphere or does it have some particularly cool magic or mechanic? This one is tricky and sort of contradicts # 2 and sometimes # 1 .

Accordingly for my own tastes, the Fourth Edition best serves # 1 ; Pathfinder # 2 and various more obscure games like Pendragon, Warhammer and Eberron serve # 3 .

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Does it work, mechanically and conceptually?

Is it fun?

No question #3 needed ...

(I quibble with the word "plausible", though I would include "does it cause me to suspend disbelief? as a disqualification under "Does it work?" In a fantasy game, "plausible" is hard for me to define.)