[casual_games] Res: Game design document

[Allen R Partridge]

I'm curious about how people handle the transition between the 
conceptual / marketing aspects and the actual implementation of the 
game. IOW, to what extent do you attempt to design architecture, 
feature implementation etc. into the GDD?

Do folks generally pass a feature list on to the programming team and 
then leave that up to them, or is architecture generally designed as 
part of the GDD and the programming team then simply following the 
path laid out in the GDD?

One other thing that I would add is that for me the GDD is very much a 
living document. While it constantly challenges me to avoid feature 
creep, I have yet to see the game that didn't want some tweaking along 
the way? Do others let the game emerge in this fashion or is common 
practice to simply follow the document, regardless of the process?

--al

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:57:44 -0000
  "Nic Cusworth" <info at medullacorp.com> wrote:

> Those slides are excellent, and see - doing this for 14 years and 

>still

> learning. 'User stories'. Really like that idea and will try doing 

>that in

> my next GDD.

> 

> Thanks for sending that link. They useful!

> 

> Nic.

> 

> P.S. His Power Point template is horrible :)

> 

> -----Original Message-----

>From: casual_games-bounces at igda.org 

>[mailto:casual_games-bounces at igda.org]

> On Behalf Of Adam Martin

> Sent: 21 March 2007 12:45

> To: IGDA Casual Games SIG Mailing List

> Subject: Re: [casual_games] Res: Game design document

> 

> On 20/03/07, oscar oscar <oscar.oscar.oscar at gmail.com> wrote:

>> Will NO ONE sacrifice one of their actual, completed design docs? 

>>^_^

>>

>> On 3/20/07, Jose Marin <jose_marin2 at yahoo.com.br > wrote:

>> >

>> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060516/carless_01.shtml

>> >

> 

> http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991019/ryan_pfv.htm is what I

> point people to when they want to know how to get going with their

> design docs, and/or when they've submitted stuff to me that is just

> not good enough as a commercial pitch.

> 

> My general advice is to write a concept first, ideally 2-3 pages, as

> per the article, and then expand that into a small GDD (no more than

> 20-30 pages max - I prefer around 10-15 for smaller games) and

> eventually a large GDD (non-casual games generally need something

> which is > 75 pages, in some cases >> 75 pages ).

> 

> I would also strongly advise people to read the slides from Damion's

> game-design-docs talk at GDC a couple of weeks ago :

> 

> http://www.zenofdesign.com/Writing_Great_Design_Docs.ppt

> 

> As has been pointed out, just arbitrarily giving out design docs is

> not generally allowed. However, I feel strongly that it's also not

> that useful, if you have a rough template (like in Ryan's article):

> IME if you cannot follow a basic standard template and organize your

> own thoughts well enough to create your own sets of sub-headings

> appropriate to each major heading, then you probably aren't ready to

> write a design doc yet. Either you need to think more about your 

>game,

> or learn generally how to compose your ideas into clearer forms.

> 

> YMMV, of course.

> 

> Adam

> _______________________________________________

> Casual_Games mailing list

> Casual_Games at igda.org

> http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive Search:

> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

> List FAQ:

> http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ

> 

> _______________________________________________

> Casual_Games mailing list

> Casual_Games at igda.org

> http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive: http://www.igda.org/casual-subscribe

> Archive Search: 

>http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=010373383720242846960%3Az3tdwggxil8

> List FAQ: 

>http://www.igda.org/wiki/index.php/Casual_Games_SIG/Casual_Games_List_FAQ