Stop Porting

In a great game design, something magical happens when the player executes an action. The resultant effect on screen does not seem like an afterthought. It feels fluid, natural, cool - it provides that feeling of control that can be found in no other medium.

This entire process requires a lot of conscious thought to "get it right." It's up to the designers to decide how the user interfaces with the game to create this sense of control. In order to successfully accomplish this, specific hardware has to be targeted by the design.

Think about something seemingly simple like shooting a bullet in Halo. You pull down on that trigger, and it feels great. That motion on some of the other controllers of the time like the PS2 controller would be a simple button press. Not nearly as satisfying, and when it is one of the main game mechanics, it can really change the feel of the game.

Let's look at two popular touch-screen interfaces. One is the Nintendo DS, the other is an iPhone. At first glance you'd think almost any simple touch-based game could be built on both easily. But after playing around with each it's clear that many game designs simply don't work well on both. A game like Meteos on the DS is extremely fun, but if/when it's ported to the iPhone, I guarantee it will be a frustrating experience. The iPhone screen was built for big, clunky human fingers. Not tiny precise plastic styluses (styli?). Meteos hinges on having this precise control, and should never be subjected to anything less.

These subtle differences in hardware matter, and mainstream game designers need to stop pretending that they don't. Please, stop the porting!

Here are the questions:

-What was the last ported game you played that just felt absolutely great to play?

-What are some more examples of subtle differences in hardware that are underestimated?

Backsteppin'

Now that we have dug in a little bit I'd like to explore the nature of what we are doing here. Let's ask the most obvious question: What is game design?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_design

"Game design is the process of designing the content and rules of a game."

Not too bad, but not quite there. Let's let Wikipedia take a mulligan: "Video game design requires the co-ordination of game mechanics, visual arts, programming, production process, audio and narrative."

(These are some hefty tasks, and each one could be broken down into many more elements. The point to make here is that game design is almost always a team/collaborative effort. The notion of a single person called "game designer" is largely unfounded.)

Ok that's a little closer. Still not quite a definition. Each of these game design areas have their own design practices surrounding them. They are all accomplished within the context of designing a game, and I believe that makes everybody involved from top-to-bottom a game designer.

"Video game design is the process of designing and coordinating game mechanics, visual arts, programming, the production process, audio and narrative."

A little lengthy but I like it! This definition is a work in progress and I would love your feedback. It gives us a good footing to discuss what great game design is, as well as all the elements that make it up.

Here's the questions:

-Do you agree or disagree with the definition of game design stated here? How would you modify it?

-Do you find yourself favoring particular components of game design over others? What aspect attracts you the most as a gamer and why?