Formal Abstract Design Tools.

"Formal Abstract Design Tools" By Doug Church from Gamasutra

Doug Church speaks heavily of making a vocabulary in which designers can talk to other designers when analysing and breaking down video games. He says that having a wider vocabulary will make analysing and testing games much easier than just saying "This was fun" or "This game isn't fun". He states tools in which designers can use and add to the language in which I personally think will help when analysing and finding out whether a game is fun or not.

He says that when breaking down games, you should look at a game you love but the bits in there which make you frustrated and annoyed, then use these mistakes as learning opportunities. He also states that you should only use the tools you need to use. Not all of the tools work well together; they can conflict and make a bad game. A good designer will take their time and look into what tools they need to use to make the game good. They don't rush into it and throw every tool they can into the game.

He says the way find the tools that designers use, we need to break down a game and find the "concrete aspects" of the game and then analyse them to find the Formal Abstract Design Tools. He then looks into tools which a lot of designers use.

Intention

"Making an implementable plan of one’s own creation in response to the current situation in the game world and ones understanding of the game play options."

Intention is put across as a really important tool in a game. Players make hundreds of subliminal plans to move forward in their games. If they do an action and it goes wrong then they are likely to realize and accept why it has gone wrong. Then they can rectify the problem to push the game forward. He then links intention with the next tool.

Perceivable Consequences

"A clear reaction from the game world to the action of the player."

This is basically saying that if the player does something in the game, then the game reacts clearly to tell them whether the interaction was successful or not and it can lead more into the story or more activities. The action in which the player does depends on what the consequence the player expects. There are games which have consequences in which the player cannot possibly expect and Church states that this can frustrate the player and then they can lose interest in the game.

Story

"The narrative thread, whether designer-driven or player-driven, that binds events together and drives the player forward toward completion of the game."

This is more about what brings the player to the next point whether it is player driven or designer driven story is a massive tool but can easily conflict with other tools. For example in Final Fantasy, the games are heavily story based but is almost completely designer-driven with the large cut scenes and the linear story line. But they give the player a lot more control by making the combat system completely player driven. They separate tools to make the game much more player driven. He says that it's like reading a book but to turn the page you must win in combat and by doing this you control the characters and items which you find through the story.

So from this I can see that certain tools are very important in games and that not all tools work well together. Also, I understand that this is just a scratch on the surface of the vocabulary meaning that I personally can expand the language and make a much better and more informative analysis of a game which I am looking into. From this now I can easily break down a game and look into the tools they have used and the tools which could make games better.