Chris Kolmatycki

Winter Olympics,

The ceremony is good,

The rest hurts T.V.

As a Game Designer, there is one skill that trumps all others in importance. The skill of communication is absolutely invaluable when dealing with all facets of a game’s life cycle. How do you want the soccer players to move following a cross into the box? Should the Carolina Hurricanes play the trap more often than other teams? Do the enemies have a high skill in using lead pipes? If they do, does it follow that they can use similar blunt objects just as well? As a designer, you should know the answer to these questions and why they are so.

There are many different components of a team (art, design, programming, etc.) and as teams often shuffle from project to project, not all members are educated in how things have worked in the past or, given something like a sports game, work in the real world. A programmer’s job is to create the vision of the designer and work around problems and bugs in order to do so.

In the example of a baseball game, the average person would likely not understand the in depth strategy of defensive shifts and fielder positioning. It is not a programmer’s job (though it would be extremely welcome and beneficial) to discern that since Ryan Howard is naturally a pull hitter, the CPU should move their fielders to the right side of the field. What they need to be able to do, is program the CPU to do that after the designer has properly communicated and explained that fact. The programmer can worry about how they wish to develop a system to determine how the defense plays for certain players.

Perhaps, even with a properly communicated explanation of why Ryan Howard pulls the ball when he hits, and why the fielders would want to adjust for that, the programmer could set up a system that, given certain attributes, can provide defensive shifts for other players such as Jim Thome or David Ortiz. Taking it a step further, if they are aware of other resources such as batter spray charts, the programmer could facilitate a script wherein the designer could create a criteria for when an AI ‘manager’ would call for his players to perform a defensive shift. This could go miles in establishing both a way of establishing manager ratings, AI, and even offensive player tendencies.

The point is, the greatest ideas mean nothing if you can’t communicate them effectively.  Though everyone thinks of communicating their ideas to an audience, people rarely seem to think about how they can communicate their ideas to the people responsible for building the game.  What do I suggest (strictly my opinion) for people trying to get into design?  Take some English or communications courses.  The skills of oral and written communication are always in high demand.

Getting Your Values Straight

To follow-up on my previous posting, it’s important to remember that a game with mass-market appeal, can still be a great game. An important part of what I do as a game designer, is the ability to not just know what is fun for myself, but to know what is fun for other people. Can you create a game that you don’t find challenging, but your target market will? Can you create a game that provides a playing experience that your grandmother would rather have, than yourself? In my opinion, you need to be able to answer ‘Yes’ to these questions in order to be a versatile designer.

As I had mentioned in my previous posting, there are several types of games I would absolutely love to see designed and created. With that said, I’m completely aware that the feasibility of these products simply are not there. I may love my baseball GM simulator, business sims, and point n click adventures, but the fact is that consumers (including even myself) seem to love their sports games, first person shooters, and party games. If I were designing a baseball game for myself, I would love to see the ability to demote and promote prospects through various levels (careful not to run out of options!) and participate in the rule 5 draft. The fact is though, you don’t always get to design games for yourself. Sometimes, you design games for people who want to take their Wii Remote, swing for the fences, and hit a home run that causes the scoreboard to explode.

It’s important to know your market and be aware that you’re not the only one who plays games. Always be aware of your market and, most importantly, make a game that’s fun. Just because you don’t always like what your market likes, doesn’t mean you can’t understand them and give them what they want. To the ‘hardcore gamer’, grab a copy of that ‘casual game’ that’s been dominating the sales charts and give it a play. You’ll better understand the direction that games are heading, and who knows, you may even have fun.

One of the largest misconceptions people seem to have is that a great idea will land them a job in the video game industry. While there are a multitude of reasons wrong with that, one common problem I’ve seen is that people design games for themselves, not everyone else. While every so often you get lucky in having your own personal tastes directly lined up with everyone else’s, that’s not always the case.

In fact, great ideas can be a dime a dozen in the gaming world. It can’t be emphasized enough how not only a great idea is needed, but great market research, and proper implementation. I’ve experienced first hand that in our studio of about 100, there have been several awesome ideas…games I think I’d love to play. What many don’t realize is that there’s a bigger picture than, “Is the game fun?”. Studios, especially independent ones, can be made or broken on their releases. On more than one occasion, the poor sales of a single title have been enough to bring down a studio.

What is more important than simply having a ‘great idea’, is doing some market research into what people are currently playing, who your market is, and can your market sustain your product. Wow, it’s almost as if the sexy world of video games is the same as every other product. You may have come up with a way to make the best hang-gliding simulator game in the world, but how many people are going to pony up the cash to make the effort worthwhile and justify the cost of production and publication?

One of my favourite games of all time has been Trevor Chan’s Capitalism 2. In a world of First Person

Shooters dominating the marketplace, it takes very careful production and marketing to develop a new idea. Would gamers today appreciate the ability to play in a near fully functional economic playground? Would they appreciate the ability to dominate the world by cornering the global markets of strawberries and motorcycles, playing the stock market, or becoming the next Best Buy? Maybe they would. But would they still be interested once they learned that every aspect from the quality of their engines (influenced of course by the training of the staff in their factories or that of the factories they’ve sourced production out to, and the quality of steel being used), the distance of the engine factory to the motorcycle assembly plant, and even the economic impact of the city they’re selling in, affects their success? I think you’ve just cut a significant part of your market out.

With that said, some people absolutely adore that kind of control. The concept and idea of Capitalism is absolutely amazing, but it definitely does not have the mass market appeal. As such, a game such as this would likely only see the light of day if its production were kept extremely tight and a smart budget were developed. While I was unable to find sales figures on the critically acclaimed title, I can’t imagine it had sold the amount that other genres have.

Conversely, looking at the Call of Duty franchise, specifically Call of Duty 4, we have a game that has sold over 10 million units. How many people enjoy shooting? How many enjoy saving the world and killing terrorists? Well, judging by the sales numbers, many many people. A franchise like COD can afford to have more polish put into it.

Being a large fan of COD4, I also take note that the game itself isn’t that ground-breaking a game. The game is definitely scripted gameplay at its finest, but it is indeed just that…scripted gameplay. The story is amazing and engrossing, they do a fine job of immersing you into the game world, and the game mechanics are solid. COD 4 doesn’t challenge the user to solve puzzles using time shifting mechanics, become Liberty City’s most wanted in a near-completely open world, or become an entrepreneur in a fully comprehensive economic climate. It does something simple and ordinary in an absolutely amazing and stunning way.

By no means is this a shot at the COD series, but it is akin to listening to Pop music vs. Classical, an Art Exhibit or a 3D Eye Painting, or Ballet vs. a Striptease. They’re all entertainment, but some have far more mass appeal than the other.

Now more than ever, games aren’t just for gamers. They’re for everyone. I’ve seen some amazing ideas fall by the wayside due to the fact that not nearly enough people would appreciate them to justify the cost of production (I’m looking at you, point and click adventures). It’s a shame that this is the case, but it’s difficult to put developers and publishers at fault for wanting to ensure their own survival. In my opinion, the most important thing for a game to do is create fun. If you can’t create a fun experience for the people who vote with their wallet, no amount of ‘revolutionary design’ can make up for your failure.

Through my daily perusal of the Internets, I came across a rather interesting Flash game at Mazapan. In Metro Rules of Conduct, the objective is to use the arrow keys to “look” at interesting things on the subway such as mp3 players, scarves, cell phones, and ties…without having anyone make eye contact and see you.

Created as a tongue in cheek response to the anti-social behavior that occurs on the Stockholm Metro, I’m sure that any public transit commuter can empathize with the awkwardness experienced when a busy subway forces you to sit next to a stranger or the almost instinctual action of looking around at interesting things like reading magazines or books over someone’s shoulder or sneaking a peek at someone playing on their hand-held video game.

I think the game is a hilarious commentary on what we all (well maybe it’s just me) do in mass transit wherein it appears making eye contact is truly an act similar to that of death. I had flashbacks of the TTC from my Toronto days…though it may do me well to start playing this in light of my impending vacation back home.