A Treatise on Feature Development

Hey everyone!

I just wanted to state my two cents on the development of features for a game. I had a moment of clarity yesterday as my friends were play-testing my game. I had designed and built a game, sure, but I realize I built more of an idea for a game than a game itself. I certainly had grandiose ideas, an overarching storyline, and plenty of motivation but that does not make a game, per se. The advantage of games is their interactability, it is what makes this medium different than most other forms of expression. This also means that when building and designing games, the ultimate focus should be on the consumer (shocker, right?). You would be surprised how easy it is to get sidetracked. After all, you are not the intended consumer, are you? You have a more intricate knowledge of your game and its systems than anyone else and so things come intuitively to you that may be completely obscured to the player. Most game developers know this and so are smart enough to place in systems to help the player along, this is not new information. What I hope to add to the discussion with this DevLog is how my experience developing Atlas has made me realize the proper philosophy for feature design with the player constraint in mind. The most important part of every game is the gameplay loop. This is typically the first thing developed and is what inspires the game. That being said, sometimes developers (looking at myself), can become too distracted in what comes next: the visuals, the story, the polish, and fail to give the core gameplay loop enough thought: enough development, but not enough thought. The first step to gamemaking is design. Any programmer, artist, etc. worth their cent can develop an idea into a reality; that does not make the idea a good idea. That is why I emphasize that a person (again, calling myself out, I'm sure you are all amazing devs) can develop a feature or facet enough, without putting enough thought into it. You can very easily polish a turd.  This was the experience I had with my current game, Atlas. My foray into the platformer genre was supposed to provoke thought, both emotionally and in playing the game. It was supposed to force the player to think in ways no platformer has made people think before. When playing the game, you must manage your own platforming as well as the path of an uncontrollable black orb that threatens death. I don't believe this basic concept is terrible. The issue was  in my execution. I should have taken the time to consider how the player could most meaningfully interact with these constraints. Instead, I made a half-baked system that had a terribly playing experience. The orb added nothing. I realized, after some reflection. It was merely a nuisance.  No amount of skill or thought could ensure victory. Do not make nuisance features, no one enjoys them.  I believe that it is quite common to believe that a concept for a feature should suffice for its execution. This could not be farther from the truth. Execution is everything. No player can read your thoughts they can only play the game. With that in mind, have other people playtest your game lots, it will let you discover new things and ideas with your game, you scarcely thought possible.

Happy developing,

Niic.

TLDR: Make every feature add something to the playing experience.