I have no words, I must design: Notes

2   )They’re all games. But how to make sense of this amazingly disparate

fi eld? What is it about all these games that makes them interesting? Do they

even have anything in common, when you get down to it?

To understand games, to talk about them intelligently, and to design

better ones, we need to understand what a game is, and to break “gameplay”

down into identifi able chunks. We need, in short, a critical vocabulary for

games.

3  ) Almost every game has some degree of puzzle-solving; even a pure

military strategy game requires players to, e.g., solve the puzzle of making

an optimum attack at this point with these units. In fact, if a game involves

any kind of decision making, or trade-offs between different kinds of

resources, people will treat these as “puzzle elements,” trying to devise

optimal solutions. Even in deathmatch play of a fi rst-person shooter, players

will seek to use cover and terrain for advantage – ‘solving the puzzle’ posed

by the current positions of opponents and the nature of the surrounding

environment, if you will. You can’t extract puzzle from game entirely.

4  ) A light switch is not a game, obviously. Interaction has no game value in

itself. Interaction must have a purpose.

5  ) Aha! Now we’re not talking about “interaction.” Now we’re talking about

decision making – interaction with a purpose.

6   ) What makes a thing into a game is the need to make decisions. Consider

Chess: It has few of the aspects that make games appealing – no simulation

elements, no roleplaying, and damn little color. What it’s got is the need to

make decisions. The rules are tightly constrained, the objectives clear, and

victory requires you to think several moves ahead. Excellence in decision

making is what brings success.

7  ) At every point, he or she considers the game state. That might be what

he sees on the screen. Or it might be what the gamemaster has just told him.

Or it might be the arrangement on the pieces on the board. He considers his

objectives, and the game tokens and resources available to him; he considers

his opposition, the forces he must struggle against. He tries to decide on the

best course of action.

8  ) Some years ago, Will Wright, in a speech at the Game Developers

Conference, described SimCity, which he designed, as a software toy. He

offered a ball as an illuminating comparison: It offers many interesting

behaviors, which you may explore. You can bounce it, twirl it, throw it,

dribble it. And, if you wish, you may use it in a game: soccer, or basketball, or

whatever. But the game is not intrinsic in the toy; it is a set of player-defi ned

objectives overlaid on the toy.

9  ) A game without goals is a game that’s dead. Objectives, so interactions with a purpose à you can give yourself goals.

Struggle ----à something to overcome a way to improve & get better. Adds competition to games

Structure ---à shapes player behaviour

Endogenous meaning ---à things that are meaningful within the game.