[MUSIC PLAYING]
All right.
Here we go.
So before my life here at Google,
I used to be a creative director at Pogo.
And in the process, I created a lot of games.
And most of them, they were pretty good.
But there were a few flops as well.
Now, the hit games, those are great because those
are the ones I feature very prominently on my LinkedIn
profile.
But the flops were the valuable ones,
because those are the ones where I learned everything.
And I started to notice patterns with some
of mistakes I was making.
And as I discovered, these were mistakes that
were not just specific to me.
Lots of people were making them in lots of different games.
And so I wanted to share three of them with you today.
So first mistake I often see, one of the most common,
is kitchen-sinking your design.
This is a term I use when you have a game where
you're basically throwing everything but the kitchen sink
at it.
And generally, this is because you're not
confident with the core game design,
and you are trying to compensate by covering it up with junk.
The most common symptom is this-- hey,
let's add more power ups in our game.
If you keep throwing more and more power ups at your game,
that's a good sign you are probably kitchen-sinking it.
I suppose if you're more of the academic,
theoretical-game-theory-type of person,
it manifests itself this way-- hey,
we should add some more risk-reward mechanics,
because those are always good, right?
Yeah.
They're good.
But you know how many you should have for any given
system in your game at most?
One.
Right?
Any more than that, and your audience gets confused.
So what do we do if we're kitchen-sinking our game?
We need to fix our core.
You are adding all this crap because deep down you are not
confident in your core design.
It needs to be fun on its own.
So take away all your power ups, all your bonus levels,
and just play your game.
Are you having fun yet?
No?
Then make it fun first.
Once you've done that, then, yes, it's OK go ahead
and your power ups back in.
They're great.
My advice here is concentrate on power ups that
change the way the user plays and not just
the same but better.
Think of the super leaf in Mario,
or the power pellet in "Pac-Man,"
or the gravity gun in "Half-Life."
All very, very nice power ups.
Oh, and by the way, if you find that your game isn't
any fun without a particular power up
or a bonus level, that's OK.
Just take that and make that your base game experience.
And then kind of build up your end-game conditions
and scoring and everything else from there.
We did a couple times at Pogo.
It worked out.
Second big mistake I often see-- holding onto good ideas
longer than you should.
So sometimes we find this great hook, this new twist, whatever,
and we're so proud of ourselves because it's
the most clever idea ever.
The problem is that it is ruining everything else.
Let's say, for instance, we've got
a really clever way of adding a time limit to our level.
And so it's really neat and innovative,
but the problem is our end-game isn't very good yet,
our scoring needs work, and the power ups
are also kind of boring.
But every solution we come up with,
we put in the reject pile, because it doesn't
fit our time-limit system.
Or to put it another way, let's say we're
trying to make a sandwich.
I've got some great mayonnaise.
But then we've also got say some peanut butter, and some jelly,
and maybe a banana, none of which we put on our sandwich
because none of it really goes with mayo.
But what ends up happening is instead of getting
to eat a delicious PB&J, you're at home
eating mayonnaise out of a jar because you couldn't find
anything that went with it.
So the solution here is hold the mayo.
I'm sure it's great mayonnaise and/or time-limit system.
But it's preventing you from getting
your sandwich or game made.
It's not doing you any good.
And so this happens all the time in game design.
You are going to have a ton of ideas both good and bad.
I think any run-of-the-mill game designer can kill the bad
ideas.
But a good game designer is the one
who can kill the good ideas that don't serve the core
or perhaps are preventing better ideas from coming along.
As the saying goes, sometimes you have to kill your darlings.
So moving on to the third mistake
I often see, rejecting bad suggestions
just because they are bad.
So here is the issue.
Play testers are going to find fault with your game.
But, you know, they're probably your friends or your fans
and so they want to be nice.
So instead of telling you, hey, your climbing system
is kind of poopy, they're going to say, hey,
have you thought about maybe adding a grappling hook gun?
Well, here's what happens.
You know your game way better than this other person does.
And so your mind immediately latches on
to the five perfectly legitimate reasons
why a grappling hook is the worst idea ever,
and it will ruin your game.
And, you know, we're game designers.
Sometimes we're a little defensive.
Sometimes we're a little petty.
And maybe there's some of that going on.
And we tell this person who dared criticize our game why
their idea is so terrible and it's never going to work.
And the thing is, we are absolutely right.
But here is the problem.
Of course their suggestion is bad.
They've been playing your game for all of 10 minutes.
They don't know any of the underlying systems that
are going on underneath.
They're just trying to help.
And so if you say, well, grappling hook, that's
a dumb idea, and you move on, then
you have missed a golden opportunity
to notice that you're climbing mechanic isn't any good
and needs to be fixed, because no one
else is going to tell you this.
So don't shoot them down, silence those voices that
are telling you-- again, totally legitimately--
why their suggestion is bad.
Instead, stop and consider why they
are giving you that suggestion in the first place.
What are they trying to fix for you?
Or, you know, you could just ask them?
That works, too.
So, in summary, one, don't kitchen-sink your design.
Fix your core.
Two, don't hold onto a good idea just because it's good.
Sometimes you have to hold the mayo.
Three, don't reject a bad idea just because it's bad.
Look at what problem your users are trying to solve for you.
Incidentally, the great thing about all these problems
is that the best defense is simply being aware
of the fact that they exist in the first place
so that you can identify and call them
out the next time they happen to you, which they will.
So look at that.
You've all become better game designers simply
by showing up and listening to this presentation.
And with that, I am out of time.
Thank you very much.
[APPLAUSE]
[MUSIC PLAYING]