An instant prototype for a multiple-screen rotation-based puzzle game. Does involve leading trains of cute creatures past lethal traps. |
This can of course be achieved in different ways through different types of work. Inside the realm of game design I have found that the greatest enabler of this is the possibility of exchanging thoughts and ideas with design-interested peers, regardless of the specific work done. For me, discussing game design at a theoretical level can be equally as interesting as creating actual systems and detailed mechanics. Having a discussion on a theoretical level gives the luxury of exploring, where you can do whatever without having the need for it to actually “work” in a sense. The joy of theory where everything works and no compromises have to be made, neither technological nor economical. One can dream.
A defeatist attitude brings nothing to a project. There are always fixes to be made, often bringing a large payoff with little effort. The tricky thing is to identify them. |
While I do specialize in system and mechanics design I have found that I can be useful when it comes to evaluating and iterating assets when cooperating with group-members with other fields of specialization, mostly from a larger end-design perspective. Having some experience with both code and 3D-modeling I at least know the limitations, which is usually enough to give constructive (and more important realistic within the production) feedback and at all costs staying away from ever trying to micro-manage others work. Trying to hunt down those small fixes that bring huge positive effect for little work is greatly rewarding, both for the end-product and team morale. When working like this it helps greatly not to be in charge of management and scheduling, something that I try to avoid. In the best of worlds should a designer never manage the time and resources of a project but simply focus on improvement at all levels.
No comments:
Post a Comment