Just to clarify for some of the comments - as I state in the video, the game will have both puzzle and platforming aspects, but with puzzles as the dominant genre. The problem came from trying to have both very challenging execution-based platforming, and very challenging logic-based puzzles, and expecting players to bounce back and forth between them. I feel like this is not suitable, so had to make one dominant and the other secondary, and decided to make puzzles be dominant as that is where the game keeps swinging towards. Hope that makes sense! Things should become clearer as development goes on (I hope, for my sake)
As long as the platforming bits cut to short piece, it's OK to have many of them, as it costs little to retry, and you can still feel accomplished doing them. Just don't put a Path of Pain gauntlet in it.
Yeah, I thought that maybe the platforming levels could be a break from the challenging puzzles, but that would only work if the platforming wasn't very challenging. Perhaps you could make the platforming seem like it is challenging by making it exciting when the player has the right skills, like that level that got you excited, but just not making it really require so much precision or quickness, and having some checkpoints, so anybody can finish them. And this platforming levels could have timers and a grade or reward as an extra, not needed to progress, so the players that like fast paced action have some reason to improve, even if not so much is asked from them to complete the level.
I know this series is specifically about the process of making a game, but each video has hit me in the gut with weirdly relevant lessons about life in general
I completely agree. The "analysis paralysis" resonated way too much with me. Definitely going to mention this video in my next therapy session. Mark, as always, wonderful video. Thank you so much for sharing this process with us.
Agreed! Tinkering with mechanics is how you find inspiration- other people approach things differently, and can find different ideas Instead of falling into the hole of "oh no it's not good enough" get lots of feedback and maybe something will inspire you
Never thought of Primer being interested in Game Dev! Funny anecdote from my school life, I was really excited when I found out that my maths teacher was playing CS in her free time. Her comment was "Sometimes, teachers can have really interesting hobbies." That's what I feel now, allthough Primer's science animations/simulations are closer too game dev than math is to shooters.
Some feedback/tips as a pro webdev / hobbyist gamedev: 1. 16:00 "I've talked about how I'm being indecisive about the game's genre, but if you watch me making the game in Unity these last few weeks, you'd see me being indecisive about everything. I'm constantly trying and changing and messing around with different elements and ideas as I struggle to understand the identity of this game." You elaborate how the situation is similar to scope creep, but actually assert it is decision paralysis, illustrating the difference. And I believe your understanding of the problem is accurate; however, I would argue that the decision paralysis itself is a symptom of a deeper problem. You are finding yourself caught between not necessarily two *genres* but two (or more) gameplay experiences. How do you want a player to *feel* when they are playing the game? What emotions or thought processes do you want them to have? Then, how can you use the game's mechanic to artificially ellicit those feelings/emotions/thought processes in the player? This should be the mental workflow you take in designing the mechanics and levels, and then what mechanics you actually approve of and incorporate/finalize is built by using the above as a reference point. You touch on this when you "converted from a platformer to a puzzler" with the changes to the camera, level design, character movement speed, jump height, and availability of mechanics. You associated gameplay experiences with the genres, effectively mapped design differences between them, and then applied them, but you never actually identified which game experience *you* wanted to deliver and then compared the traditional genres' gameplay experiences to see how well they match up or whether they were a fit for the target experience for which you are aiming. In game design, identifying the details of this target gameplay experience is done by creating what are called the "Game Design Pillars". I think you are familiar with the term, but are experiencing the need for them first-hand. (Reminder link: orioldedios.github.io/Game-Design-Pillars/) If the pillars have been defined ahead of time, then you can almost *immediately* ascertain whether a potential mechanic or level design will contribute toward or degrade the game's acceleration toward those pillars. As you are brainstorming and experimenting with various ideas (which is good!), you must also be able to quickly determine if the idea actually helps or not - and then, if not, is there some alteration you could make to the concept that would enable it to rejoin the other pillar-aligned ideas you've developed thus far. If no version of the idea can be made that actually aligns with the projects vision/pillars, then it has to be scrapped, no matter how much it is liked or how much effort was put in to it ("Kill Your Darlings"). The advice you received from Oliver about enforcing constraints on devtime is just an artificial means of forcing oneself to make a decision regarding the pillars in order to empower you to breach through the decision paralysis. So, genres confer expectations of particular emotional experiences which means they have a specific subset of pillars to which they expect a game to conform. That is, the emotional experiences are expressions of the game's pillars. Your process thus far is to start with mechanics and work backward towards genre (all the while not targeting the pillars behind them). This has led to a feeling of directorial confusion. What I would recommend and challenge you to do is come at it from the other direction where you clearly outline *what* it is you want to build, and then let that guide your path for which mechanics will best support creating that experience. Then, whatever "genre" is associated with the game will just naturally fall into place by virtue of how closely the chosen pillars/mechanics align with said genre(s). This is, in fact, how *new* genres are made. Someone invents a game with some combination of pillars for which there is no popular term, and thus, a new genre name is made for it. 2. 19:08 "I'd look at, like, what are the core things you need to make this game you are envisioning...we usually talk about an MVP, minimal viable product." The methodology Oliver is advocating for is something that has a proper term in software engineering which is "Agile" (with which you are also likely familiar). You put an emphasis on developing iterative deliverables that are fully playable/usable and which provide concrete value to the end-product. Then, at the end of the "sprint", you reflect on how things are going, get feedback from your audience, outline a list of things that need doing (changes to the design, tasks to complete, etc.), assign priorities to each of those tasks, and then pick the next subset of tasks which you think you can accomplish in the next "sprint". The most popular manifestation of the agile mindset is the "Scrum" methodology. Hope this info helps! Loving the videos so far, and I really appreciate your ability to communicate the gamedev experience to a broader audience like this. :-D
Man, this is a far better and more concrete way of saying the garbage that I spewed in my comment. It's also helped clear up some doubts I've had about my own project as well. I really appreciate you for taking the time to write this out!
Thank you for sharing your advice, this was comprehensive, practical and inspirational all at the same time. I really enjoyed reading what u had to say!
There’s something that I’ve come to realize over the years: pretty much *every* game is a puzzle game in some form or another. That high-speed platformer level you made is also a puzzle - you have to figure out the order to use your abilities to get where you want to go.
That isn't actually meaningful or helpful to game design or anything really. It's a tautology of sorts. Games don't play themselves and so require the player to do something. Second point is that a call of duty is so difficult from bejeweled that it isn't even comparable anymore. Or take doom and portal. They both have "shooting" but are so different from one another that calling them both shooters is disingenuous and doesn't capture the reality of the situation.
This is an interesting idea. City-builders are puzzles (how do I fix traffic?). Roguelikes are puzzles (what combination of resources, resource management, and good RNG will make a successful run?). Simulations are puzzles (where do I place X to maximize its benefit?). RPGs are puzzles (what combination of skill points, abilities, and party members will work best?). Strategy games are puzzles (how do I maximize my start location? which build/techs/units do I go for?) Action-adventure games are puzzles (I have these weapons and abilities; how can I use these against an enemy's weak points or AI patterns?).
I mean thats basically what games are. Games create a virtual environment and present problems that you need to find a solution to. If a "game" doesn't have any puzzles, or problem solving elements to it, it wouldn't be called a game, it would be called a toy or sth like that.
The “platforming” level is a puzzle already, you’d have to figure out the solution rather than just playing through it. It just happens that the solution to the puzzle requires fluid, platforming like movement but there was really no need to remove it
Very true. I could see a puzzle and platforming levels selected on the main screen. Or just combine them in a meaningful way and with properly paced progression
That's exactly what I thought. An occasional change of pacing simply brought by level design doesn't completely change its genre nor target audience. But I agree to what's said in the video, you can't have half of one and half of the other or it will feel weird. The change needs to be justified within the game, and it can only work for a cinematic game, with enemies suddenly pursuing you for instance, or on the contrary slower special areas.
I'm really impressed by the level of personal sharing and reflection in these videos! These are such common things in the process of creation and they're communicated so well here.
Yes, this sort of issue is probably the biggest things that stops newbies from going further in their creation and it's the first time I've seen someone talk about it.
I also noticed that he’s doing a remarkable job keeping the video interesting and well paced without getting bogged down in details but not loosing all the detail too, inferno plus often hits this problem in his game mods dev videos but he also has a problem with scope creep
I also think he's doing a great job of communicating how he plans to tackle these obstacles, with advice (such as set an arbitrary time limit) that is widely applicable to a variety of creative projects!
The only times I have ever finished a game has been in game jams. Constraints fuel creativity. The problem most everyone has even in game jams isn't that they don't have any ideas. Instead it's usually paralysis because they have the world of possibilities that need to be narrowed down to one idea. Also, ideas are never as important as implementation.
I've only ever participated in a single game jam. It was Ludum Dare about 2 years ago. I spent the whole time learning to model, weight paint, rig, and animate a character. The game I uploaded was a small platform with a Naruto running character.
Inspired, thanks. Been planning my first game soon a year now. Doing documentations. And I thought of narrow it down when I get that far. Thanks for the words. Doing simpler projects before that game though.
If I can share one bit of wisdom that helps me in such situations: "Compromise on Details, but never on Vision" - or said differently: Pick a vision, when a decision needs to be made, make the one that supports the vision and throw away the one that doesn't - no matter which one is cooler. It's a sort of constraint outside of the domain of time.
another version of this is "kill your darlings." don't keep an element around solely because you like it, or you'll sacrifice the overall quality. to create an incredible game, everything must serve the whole.
Veteran developers too! My favorite puzzle game, The Talos Principle, was created during the development of a Serious Sam game, an FPS. A dev created a "jamming" tool that turned obstacles off, and bam, inspired the company to make a puzzle game instead.
Made a very simple platformer in C++ because I was bored at work. Turns out, It's basically just a puzzle game about movement because a grid based platformer is really all that C++ can manage. The game has really fun collision though. Since there's no "grounded" state and there's no hit detection unless your character is in the obstacle (it then pushes you out, grants you an extra jump, and/or might have some effect on your velocity based on what you ran into and repeats until it finds a valid position for you to exist). Leads to a bunch of weird movement tech. Like, being able to fall through the ground if your speed is high enough. Clipping up through the ground if you can jump into it. Walls being scalable by repeatedly jumping and then walking inside them. Pillars of cellings sucking you down and out their bottom if you touch them (I call it quicksand). Also, the air control and lack if collision allows you to fall through huge piles of ground if there are enough gaps.
The irony is, I think, that the very skillset that makes you so effective as a critic and in-depth analyzer of games; is the same skillset that makes it hard for you to create something. Because you're used to deconstructing, your instincts will actually drag you away from completion rather than towards it.
That's not very true, anyone who made any game would tell u that they had similar struggles, but with time and practice they eventually get better at it. Even though he makes videos about games all the time, that doesn't mean making games for him will be easier or harder, at the of the day, Evey game developer went through the same struggles
This feels pretty astute to me. I'm a professional editor (text, not video), so I'm good at analyzing writing, picking it apart, seeing what works and what doesn't, suggesting possible revisions, etc. But "analysis paralysis" basically describes my life. I can see and weigh alternatives and their pros and cons all day. But making an actual, permanent decision is terrifying to me.
You could add a magnet dispenser at various points where you need the player to have a magnet. That way you could keep your platformer design while ensuring that the player will have a magnet when needed, and not have the magnet recall functionality force the magnet to go through walls or otherwise not act like a magnet.
It could actually be incorporated into the story of the game. For some reason the dispensers start to become scarce until there are no more (or maybe the player encounters the last magnet or a special one) and so they have to learn the ability to call the magnet over so that they can keep going.
Okay, but what if the character *was* a magnet dispenser? Like, a little robot wearing a mechanical backpack that pops out magnets. You start with two abilities: throwing the magnet, and remotely destroying the magnet. Like, just have it detonate like a mine (this could also be made to double as an attack). You can also only have one magnet onscreen at once, so in order to produce a new magnet you have to detonate the one you just threw. As you progress through the game, you periodically get upgrades that increase the number of magnets you can have onscreen by one. You can also only detonate your magnets in the order you spawned them, a limitation that lends itself naturally to interesting puzzle design. You later get the ability to change the magnets' polarity, but you can only change it for *all* of the onscreen magnets at once (though only the ones you have thrown, not the one you're currently holding), which again, opens the door to some interesting and tricky puzzles. This eliminates the need for a "recall" ability and really opens up the gameplay a lot, I feel. You can also add a function later on that lets you detonate *all* thrown magnets at once or gives you a toggle which, when activated, makes all magnets automatically detonate soon after you let go of them, which effectively allows the gameplay to shift freely between freer platforming segments and more constrained puzzle stages, since automatic detonation makes the magnet supply function like a cooldown meter for your magnet-based platforming abilities.
As a games design student, I can already see the value of my course here. They've already talked to us about this and I've had the chance to explore most of these problems and issues on my own (AND I'VE BEEN ON THE COURSE FOR 3 MONTHS), making game prototypes. There is a huge amount of projects due, but these videos really helped me see the value behind my course and why it is SO important to stick to it. So thank you!
I’m sure he’s already got so much of this done in advance, but I could see these concepts becoming a really cool puzzle/Metroidvaina, which is a spin on both genres that hasn’t really been seen before. You solve different puzzles in areas to progress, finding new abilities as you go along which help you solve more puzzles, and maybe even get those BoTW flashes of agency where you use your nonlinear assortment of power ups to complete a puzzle in your own uniquely clever way. Unraveling ZDR or Hallownest is already a bit of a puzzle in and of itself, so making the navigation focus on puzzles instead of combat could be really cool.
This is a super great idea- it’d add loads of unique flavour to the unlocks, and it would work with a fusion of platforming and puzzle elements. It’d also serve to reintroduce the idea of combat and enemies as problems to solve into the game.
The major risk here is pulling a bait and switch on the player. If the game wants to end as a big bombastic platformer but starts as a plodding puzzler, players may get put off as the platformer complexity rises. So Mark would have to continuously remind the player that isn't a hard platformer, but with only a fraction of the tools. A great example of the bait and switch problem is Brutal Legend. Shafer set out to build an RTS on console. It was the primary mechanic he wanted to explore and base the game around. But they started the game as a brawler, due to the idea that you were supposed to be part of the RTS army, not just a commander. So you spend the first 10 hours playing before the RTS mechanics are introduced. When they are first brought in, they are just companions that can be commanded, so players will go business as usual. The RTS gameplay slowly starts to take over, and eventually you can't just brawl your way through fights. So the game ends frustratingly as you now have all the cool brawler moves unlocked, but you're better off just commanding the army. It leaves the player with a huge letdown as the game closes out.
This is honestly such a cool idea and I would love to play a game like this, but i think it would be really difficult to design, especially puzzles that have multiple solutions based on non-linear progression, but if it could be done that would be amazing
Im a Dutch student enrolling in game design technology study and a course for production management. The university literally sourced you as a good starting point for the portfolio assignment for people who don't have a lot of experience. Im seriously impressed by how interesting each new video is. You never repeat yourself and each topic is unique but equally interesting. Im glad I found this channel
Answering the question of what genre your game should be is a trap, don't do it just follow the fun. Genres are poorly defined categorization systems for consumers to find games similar to ones they already know they like. They should not be a set of limitations that you intentionally put on yourself as a designer. Game design is a creative field, you should only be putting limitations on yourself to instigate creative solutions
I feel like this is a trap people also fall into a lot in fiction too. Tropes are to analyze *post-mortem*, not to create around. They also tend to have genre and medium confused
Great point, it was so interesting that as Mark thought about which of the two genres the game would be, he had this idea about what he was "allowed" to include, like only a puzzler could include certain things or only a platformer could include certain things. I actually felt visceral discomfort at that part of the video (about 5 mins in) and needed to rewatch to realize that that feeling was me going "why?" to the either/or of it all.
just a thought - the nice feeling platforming level could be classified as a timing puzzle level in my opinion. Same old portal had a couple of levels that were different in dynamics and revolving more around getting the right timing. I found them really nice.
"Puzzle Platformer" is a thing, could try and find a medium... And, heck, a lotta speedrunning is akin to puzzle solving for faster solutions next run. Puzzles AS fast, essentially. Rather than as opposite ends of a spectrum.
speedrun puzzle platformers is a niche genre (mostly some mario maker levels) which i love and it brought great pain to watch him reject puzzle platformers
every game is a puzzle game ....to some degree The moment a magnet was added it became a puzzle game. The moment a player that can run around and jump on platforms was added it became a platformer game. What I would suggest is focus on making the best/most intuitive levels in the given time, rather than overthinking about genre. The platforming+puzzle level at 9:45 was absolutely brilliant in my opinion. Anyways, its just my opinion, I am noob too, so what do I know hehe
"It turns out that game development is just full of these tiny unforseen microdecisions to make" resonated with me hard because that's what writing fiction is like too. You think you've got it sorted if you know the basic plot points but you keep being ambushed by things like "Wait, how much firewood can a single person carry and how many logs of firewood does one night require?"
Okay, I'm 99% percent sure that you were talking about writing a novel and not D&D stuff but I'm gonna talk about this anyway cause it made me think of this. SO much of what's been talked about in these videos I think would be really useful for writing D&D campaign as, like you are mentioning with writing fiction, I often mind myself getting caught up in really random details (normally far off, irrelevant but really cool lore ideas) that really don't matter that much. Meanwhile, the actual adventure that the players will be playing is neglected and doesn't turn out all that well. Other DM's have seconded me on this as well. I feel like the process of making a Minimum Viable Product could actually be very helpful for DM's as then you can get the barebones of absolutely required stuff done first (*cough cough* the actual adventure), and can add on little nuggets of extra relevant details after. Only really worrying about the whole overarching story when it's convenient or an opportunity presents itself. Sorry for the long and kinda irrelevant reply but just though I would share some of my thoughts. Have a good day!
The worst part is not the why/how after every little detail the problem is the final why/how when you “end” because it makes you so insecure that you want to overwrite everything or just give up on that one and write a new one. I dont write stories but as a programmer this happens me often.
Man, this series just feels so relatable to me, and I'm trying to draw as much inspiration from your journey as I can to fuel my own stumbling journey.
Can we just take a second to appreciate Olivers willingness to openly share his knowledge on game design. He could perfectly be adversarial and secretive about his work, yet he is so forthcoming and helpful towards his peers. He seems like a great guy!
While he seems like a solid dude, there isn't anything deep about his advice. It's very much the agile working method, which 90% of developers are familiar with (which doesn't mean they all work that way, but at least they're familiar with it).
And not just Oliver but most game devs I've known. Everyone is so open and supportive. The fact that publicly listed for-profit corporations are still sharing their secret sauces at GDC is a testament to how deep the collaborative spirit runs in this industry.
@@libiroli I can't speak to digital games as much, but I've noticed that there's a lot more camaraderie than there is competition among tabletop game designers. In the case of tabletop there's not a lot of money in the industry unless you have a hugely popular breakout title so people tend to do the work out of a deep passion for the hobby. Most designers are fans first, competitors second, and everyone wants to help each other succeed because they want more great games to play. I could see there being a similar case for indie digital games.
Went to the same upper secondary school as Oliver, and he really was one of my closest friends back then. He was already studying game development and was really wonderful as a person. We hung out a lot during those three years before graduation and then sorta went different ways, but seeing him work together with someone like Mark is just really touching. It makes me happy to see that not only is he working with someone that we discussed even back then, but that he's actually in that field now.
I have worked on a lot of my own creative projects over the years. One thing I have found helps is to just write down all of the ideas you have, what you were thinking about when you came up with the idea, and why you like it and just file it away in a place you can find later for when you inevitably have writers block. I like the idea of all these different magnets that work differently and you could definitely include more of the later. You could just find different magnets in different levels, but that is not something you want to worry about now especially in the prototype phase, just tuck those ideas away for later.
I don't think platformers need to be devoid of puzzle solving. One game he looked at for inspiration was Celeste which is admittedly mainly a platformer, but has specific sections where on your first go you really need to sit down and think about how you're going to do what you need to with your limited amount of stamina and dashes (particularly in the challenge levels, but in the main game too). On top of all of that it's still difficult and satisfying to execute on the plan you've made offering replayability if so desired.
^ Seconding this. Celeste, even in its basic levels, is a puzzle-platformer. As well as the things you mention, like dash conservation & stamina, even basic platforming is a puzzle. This becomes particularly obvious in the 4th stage where the direction you dash is often the difference between being able to complete the level or not. Movement itself is a puzzle. Additionally, it has the same puzzle-game mindset of "constrained solutions", for a first-time player there is often only 1 or 2 correct path through a level (before you learn any advanced techniques - which add replay value). I think it is interesting from a puzzle-game perspective, because you never know if you have the correct solution; if you fail you don't know whether its because your method was wrong or because you aren't good enough. In a way, this solves the problem of players being able to brute force solutions to the level without solving the underlying problem (common in ace attorney). Many levels are impossible to complete with superficial understanding alone. However, it introduces the problem of players being stuck in dead ends, where they have no chance of succeeding with their method but they can never prove that it's flawed.
There are also sections of the End is Nigh, particularly some of the tumors, that kind of stump you for a minute as you reach for a solution achievable within the character's moveset.
Something I've always found usefull when working on more experimental games like yours is to decide on a theme for the game. The theme can be anything really, but should generally be something abstract and unrelated to games. Like. One against many, or the future is bleak just to name two. The theme can be a really good beacon to move towards when you have two equally good paths forward, just ask yourself which one best represents your theme. The theme can then influence everything from art style, story and even control schemes, tying the whole product together.
Great video as always! I think you're overlooking how many platformers have puzzle elements. I've heard many people while playing Celeste say that each level has two components - figuring out how to beat it, and then the execution of it. Celeste is a platformer first and puzzle second, so the execution tends to be the more difficult aspect, but to switch the genre to "puzzle first, platformer second", I think you could just switch the difficulty. Make figuring out the solution hard, and the execution as a medium difficulty. I would be interested in hearing what others think of this idea.
that's my experience with celeste. I think of it a bit like building combos in a fighting game. Each room in celeste puts you in a situation where you need to find out the correct series of inputs through a mix of game knowledge and trial and error, then execute them perfectly.
In fact Celeste is so puzzly that my first playthrough took 10 hours, the second only 2 (because I knew how to solve the rooms), and that was without any special speedrunning tech.
Exactly. That's why people who say "well Portal has both" are wrong in my opinion, because at least Portal 2 has the execution part very easy. Just because you move fast it doesn't mean it needs great skills.
17:13 The process described here is creating the map of your available options. In my opinion, a map like this one is the most important things to have when working on the game. If you don't know your options, what options lead to what consequences, what is the price of each option, etc - you are going to be making the game while being blind. At this point, you are pretty much at the hands of luck. Either your gut feeling was correct and the set of your design decisions works well together by a happy incident, or it is not, and then all the resources you spent are wasted. And the video games are among the most resource consuming projects. It's easy to spend a year or more and realise you just have to scrap it. Obviously it's necessary to move forward somehow and make decisions at some point. But neglecting the exploration process is not a good way to do that, in my opinion.
Just want to throw it in, if you like. You can lose magnets at the beginning of the level. For example, Use a magnet to climb to a platform and then leave the magnet to proceed with the level. You can supply a magnet where necessary or the level design can tell the player if they need to carry this magnet to the next level. Give the magnet a little diversity. Red magnets are normal magnets you know stick to the surface. Blue magnets can be recalled. Yellow magnets can change to the player will. To get around the problem of the difference between Red and Yellow magnets, give the blue magnet a fixed time in which it will return to you. Give the magnet a power level. You can recall the magnet but if the magnet is strong enough it will pull you. Do something interesting with it then. Give the ability to reverse the polarity of a tractor beam to use it as a trampoline. Not the brightest ideas. But nothing to lose in sharing.
I know this is an older video that I'm catching up on, but I want to thank you for the honesty or your struggles with this project. I've been a game developer for just over 10 years now and I've seen ALL of these struggles in my work and myself throughout my career. Thanks for showing more people that game development is difficult (but very rewarding).
Currently it sounds like your game could be a lot like VVVVVV, its a platformer with plenty of puzzle screens that are a bit more optional. It’s about narrow, repeatable platforming challenges that are somewhat puzzle like. Similarly, a Metroidvania format could suit this game. It gradually introduces new elements like you need and optional sections are great for sneaking in puzzles.
I thought of VVVVVV too. The part where you have to "jump" through multiple screens and be very exact just to jump back instantly when you reach the top and get the way back is so wild, it reminded me a little to the level he designed here.
I just want to say I'm SO GLAD you're making a game! No offense and I love your content; it's very insightful, especially for someone who hasn't made a game, but it's important to have gone through the process (and over and over, actually), to REALLY understand game design. It's one of the reasons I get so touchy when people call developers "lazy" or say "it's easy" or even ignore me, when I try to tell them about how each decisions affects 10k other elements in the game. I really think EVERYONE should have to make a game in school. It should be compulsory, so that everyone can understand and have a bit more respect for their favorite hobby. Keep going, it's all about learning!
This video is extremely insightful, and analysis paralysis is DEFINITELY something I don't hear talked about often that I fell into so many times. I feel like it is just as important as scope creep, and forcing ourselves to continue is good to push us further.
Your videos always strike me with how polished they are in total. Your work in general has become a reference for me, the writing in special. I struggle to make a podcast series for the place where I work, a center of studies in humanities, and GMTK, now this series in special, is a constant inspiring voice. Many thanks, Mike
Honestly I think you're getting too hung up on the idea that the puzzle and platformer concepts are in conflict. You mention puzzle platformer at the end, and that seems to be pretty obviously what this is to me, and I don't think the two main levels you showed are at odds there. It seems to me Iike a puzzle platformer has the best of both worlds, and I think it's 1000% fine to have some levels that are a bit more puzzley, and others that are a bit more platformy! My instinct would be just to make lots of levels, see what feels fun, and then put them in an order that makes sense afterwards
Agreed. Games need pacing, and the best platformers have a mix of "run run run go go go" type levels and "tread careful now! slooooly" levels. Puzzles are one way to change pace, fighting/combat mechanics are another. He seems too concerned with choosing the right recipe rather than creating his own.
Had the same thought. For example Half life switches between action and puzzle (and narrative) throughout to help with pacing and give the player a break
I agree with all these statements especially that of pacing, but we have to keep in mind he’s one person and has to limit his scope and vision. He’s proven he can go either way, but doing so also increases the complexity of the project. He may not want that. His deadline will make sure he can at least get to a finish line and see an end result.
really love Oliver's strategy, and it also helps define a loose structural way to incorporate different mechanics and eventually even a story arc. If you can make 5 levels for 5 different mechanics, you have 5 "worlds" that guide your character's progress, and you can introduce story elements to explain the changes. I keep thinking about Earthworm Jim and how he could detach his head to use it as a weapon, and it seems like something similar here would 1) tie you back to your original idea of the magnet-head, 2) provide some immediately funny character design/animations, and 3) provide a guiding principle to movement through the game (ie. you can't finish a level without your head, ability to switch out heads while limiting skillsets, etc.). Either way, absolutely love seeing the developments here and your openness about these choices being a struggle!
Braid is an interesting example, though. One of the great strengths of Braid is how each world is a different spin on the same core idea. Mechanics don't stack like powerups in Braid; they're introduced, explored, and then dropped. The different magnet concepts talked about in this video could totally work like that. The indecision could be a feature instead of a bug, if done right.
I think that's probably better for a sequel, rather than for this specific project. For now, I think it's better to focus on creating a finished game, rather than to create a game with lots of features.
This video series is an essential tool in a game maker's toolkit. There are lots of videos about the technical stuff on programming and design. Lots of videos about how game mechanics, UI, and other elements work together to enhance (or detract from) the player's experience. Lots of videos about the player's psychology when it come to gameplay loops, problem solving, and other thoughts. And lots and lots and lots of videos that say a lot of stuff but tell you very little. But there are very few videos about the real process of creating a game from scratch to finish. There's so much psychology about the game maker's themselves that isn't as easily accessible. What's it actually like to create a game? How do you make all the decisions? What happens when you take all information you can find from other sources and put it into practice? What happens in each step of the process? How do you discover and navigate the pitfalls? Those are the things this series brings forth. Those are the things that make this series unique. Or maybe there are lots of videos about all of that too, in channels I'm not aware of.
I love the puzzle + platform combo, I really disagree with the decision to cut one of them because the game is heavy on physics and has great potential for puzzles so having both would be the greatest of both worlds
yeah, they could complement each other. People who love platformers like celeste or elechead, and especially celeste farewell, do understand the games are clustered with puzzles And again, repeating puzzles is not too much of a bad thing. You could repeat it so as to reinforce mechanics while adding on more puzzles that build upon the puzzles
Your self awareness in this series really helps this serve as a guide to processing through, rather than 'trying to avoid' (which never works) some of the most ubiquitous problems in game development. Rather than telling people what to avoid this does a great job of talking through an experience that others can identify with and recognize in their own work, so that hopefully when they catch themselves stuck they've already followed you walking through the problem here, to know how to do it for their situation. Bravo!
I feel like while fun, puzzle platforms can get a bit repetitive at times. Those more fast paced rooms seem like a great way to add some sort of frequent intermission to keep the player engaged
This is gold. Your other videos are good of course, but these series has so far perhaps been more useful than all your other videos together. You are putting my own problems into words, defining what they are, why they are hard to overcome, and on top of that, you present a solution on how to overcome them, in a simple, straightforward way. This is fantastic! Thank you
A lot of these issues you are having with indecision are usually solved by gaming studios because they have a huge group working as a team, maybe it will help you to have someone to bounce ideas off of so you can step out of your own head a little bit.
Mark, just wanted to say, this is such a great series and I'm really enjoying joining your through the game making process. It adds a lot of real world / examples to theoretical ideas I've heard bantered around (e.g. minimum viable product, analysis paralysis, etc.) Thanks for inviting us along!
I think this video perfectly illustrates the strengths of an agile approach to game development (as well as to most other creative tasks). So many good ideas (if not most of the best ones) come during the process of actually working on your creative project, all of which would be lost if you chose the traditional software development approach of first doing all the planning, then doing all the developing, then doing all the bug-fixing etc. However, if you choose the iterative approach Mark lays out in these videos-building small prototypes, getting new ideas, building a better and bigger prototype etc.-you can harness all the good ideas that come in the process.
I totally agree. I don't make games but I draw little comics for fun, and my goodness, a lot of final decisions come from hiding mistakes / laziness / constraints under the carpet and then bending everything else around that. And that's not bad practice that's legitimate, it's how creating art works. I used to have all these video game ideas that I'd think they are pure gold, but turns out, an idea is: a kick in the butt to start creating something arbitrary. If I started creating a video game based off of one of those ideas... I'd just be making some videogame. Sooomething. Independently from what the original idea was. That's the best case scenario!
This is exactly what I was thinking. It draws from the psycological idea of the "implementation intention", which is basivally the psycological term for making something SMART. Decide what you want to do and when you want it to be done.
Thank you once again for making your way into my UA-cam feed, and once again reigniting the spark in my love for this industry and a project I keep losing sight of!
Mark, just wanna let you know that I've been following your channel for the longest time and this is by far the best series you've done. As interesting as your design analysis are, seeing you grasping with actual, more mundane design challenges feels a lot more insightful. I think you struck gold with this series and format, so please keep doing it!
Absolutely one of your best videos in the "GMTK developing" series yet. This one is so informative, tackles common new dev problems and mental blocks but I particularly like the mental process and decision making, the "why" you made a decision, the reasoning behind it and reflecting on why this became an issue to begin with. Love it, keep em coming man.
This series is absolutely enthralling to watch. Your videos on the theory and principles of game design have always been top notch, but seeing you work through the difficulties of creative design is inspirational. I can't wait for the next installment of Developing.
Hey Mark, I’m a long time GMTK watcher and a first time UA-cam commenter. I am currently taking a video game storytelling course in college and have been adjusting my focus in class projects to the development side of games, solely because of this series. I just wanted to say how inspiring I find your recent venture into an unknown creative world, and I am tuned in for every update. Anyways, I wrote this comment to tell you that I love the idea of including magnetic fields’ effects in your projectile beam. Messing around with how the lines will curve and flip based on magnetic fields the player has control over is a fascinating game mechanic. I wish the best for you and cannot wait to play your finished game.
Great video as always! But also here's me, a game developer, scratching my head a little about what's wrong with having these two levels together? They seem totally fine to me! The game requires platforming literacy, so it's never going to be a pure puzzler. And it's also already too complex for a twitch platformer in the vein of Super Meat Boy. Thankfully, puzzle platformers are a thing ;). In this kind of setup, you use slow levels to establish new mechanics and possible puzzle segments in a controlled environment, letting the player figure out all the interactions without any time pressure. Then you introduce the element of execution with tighter and tighter opportunity windows (see Braid or Portal). Intertwining slower head-scratchers and twitchy gamepad-breakers also helps with the pacing and gives you more tools for designing further stages without having to figure out something completely new every time. All in all, I'd say it's too early to worry about the identity of the game or kill your darlings. It's still a basic prototype, so go with the flow and make...whatever really. Only once you've got several levels that can be played in a row, you'll be able to tell how it all gels together and what works best long-term. It may well turn out that your slower puzzle level is a nice change of pace in an otherwise twitchy game. Or vice versa. :) Aside from the self-imposed deadline, which I think is a great idea, my advice would be to limit the time you iterate on a level to nearly zero. Once it's playable, it's done, has to be placed in the game, and can't be chaged further during this "milestone". This should help with the analysis paralysis a bit. Good luck with this! I'm very much looking forward to the rest of the series!
I feel like a lot of those ideas that you felt you were getting caught up with could all work in the same product, rather than being obstacles - for instance, it could be a physics-based puzzle-platformer where you can drag objects to and from you, as well as there being stuff that could get dragged to by holding the magnet, and you could differentiate between them by size, or color, or some other visual cues. The best puzzle-platformers have lots of mechanics that all work with each other and mesh well with our personal understanding of physics and whatnot. That said, I agree scope creep can be a problem, so you ought to come up with a defined beginning and end that are good enough before adding more to the heap.
I still remember the first time I made my own prototype and showed it to my friends and family for playtesting years ago. We made some little questionnaires for feedback and passed them out. The pride of my own work, the regret of not doing it better, the anxiety of people not liking the game. What you talked in the video hits so closed to home. Well researched as always, but I see that you’re taking inspiration from a lot of bigger budget industry games. For these kind of puzzle platformers, you need look no further than your own game jams. Soulward and Out of sight, out of mind comes to mind when you were describing your levels and both were excellent in short and concise levels. Especially how the gem in soulward blocks damage when you’re carrying them, perhaps could be a fun mechanic with the magnet too? For the recalling method, my first instinct was actually to give player two magnets of opposite polarity and the player can use one to call back another or throw both of them out. But that might be too complicated depends on the implementation. Also, don’t worry about genre too much. When Hideo Kojima was asked what genre Death Stranding is, he simply answered that it is the strand type game. I love how he refused to be confined in one set genre. Perhaps the same could apply to you too? Just make a “magnet type game” and I’m sure a lot of people will enjoy it. Wish you all the best and we’re all looking forward to your progress.
"I feel like I've hit on some interesting formulas and techniques for making good puzzles" Step 1: Attempt to make a platforming level. Step 2: Success
What i love about these videos is the authenticity. I have never seen a game development video that acknowledges and owns all the problems he describes. I want to develop games once my kids are older, and it's easy to think that you are the only game designer who struggles with these problems. Much appreciated Mark.
My advice is to make the game YOU want to make. The most common reason I have for dropping projects has been straying away from what I wanted to make in favour of what the projects should logically have been.
As a DM who very often gets caught up in the weeds when writing an adventure, the Minimum Viable Product approach sounds very helpful. Thanks for the great video!
Great video! It's really interesting to see this "personal" side of game development. Also I respect your "kill your darlings" attitude, that would probably be the part I'd fail at.
What if the player had all abilities at the start, but they weren't told about it yet? I'm thinking about your video on Toki Tori 2. If you had a game that was a puzzle game at the start, but had speedrun-esque alternate solutions, then you could truly have both. I'm just starting out as well, it's really inspiring to have someone else's journey to follow.
This could backfire. For example, in Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, you have access to all your combat skills, but you're only gradually taught said skills. Playing through the game a second time, knowing all the combat skills, I quickly lost interest and didn't end up finishing my second play through.
@@gowzahr Fair point. I guess the question is, would it be more, or less repayable? I replay Portal every now and then, but haven't touched Baba is You after playing through once. Honestly, I feel like "What makes a puzzle game repayable" is the kind of question I'd be interested in seeing a video on. My current guess is that player skill and mastery makes me want to come back to a game.
Like other commenters have said, even fast, fluid, speed-runnable platformers like Celeste or Ori are simply puzzles in which you need to figure out-often through trial and error-which combinations of jumps, timings, and abilities will get you through a level. Once you figure the puzzle out, they just require you to complete the puzzle quickly in one go. Both levels you made are puzzles. One just requires you to input the steps to solve it while moving.
Go with High Speed Puzzle Platformer… it’s more unique than just sticking to one of the two and isn’t too much to chew. Also Thor Hammer recall is something that should be unlockable. You can make it work by only having certain walls it can be retrieved through so no issues with collision and your other concerns.
The thing with high speed puzzles is that most puzzle game players (like myself) don't want puzzles to rely on accurate mechanical execution, whereas platformers rely on precisely that for smooth and challenging gameplay. the two genres don't mix as well as you'd imagine. Of course the game would be very interesting with both genres combined, but interesting and clever doesn't always equal fun.
MVP is a great piece of advice. I've seen game prototypes where everything was just different coloured cubes (table was one colour, NPC was another colour, player was colour 3, etc, etc, etc) for example, while the finished game had proper models, and very simplified mechanics. It's great to just see how well the idea works.
20:15 Haha, that's amazing! I started a 30 day challenge about a month ago. Same thing: 30 days, with breaks, learn all about game design. Best of luck with it!
This is perhaps my favorite ever GMTK video. Oh, the existential struggle of game development! I love how you describe this creative bumper car journey of design, experimenting, reflection, re-adjusting, etc, etc. :D
This reminds of this time I had a conversation with someone at work. I've been working on a game for nine years and somehow my friend convinced me to just get something done. I decided that day I would release the game to the internet in a week from then no matter what. My end goal was to just have something presentable, and that was it. I could have pushed it back another week, but I really cut a lot of corners and got something done. Mark, I'm glad that you experienced something that I had to learn the hard way. It's funny that I'm back in the same situation as you were (again) trying to figure out what to do next. I think its time I set some more deadlines.
Congratulations, you're doing it! Your constant questioning and experimentation is a core process in game development! I am LOVING how you are documenting these problems and your PROCESS of moving through and beyond them. I work as a technical artist in video games and there's always at least one (often more) point where you have a glut of ideas and uncertainty, etc. Weather I'm drawing something, setting up a UI, designing a shader, or designing something else in my own time, at some point you need to decide. Also, I love how you talk about 'what the game wants to be'. That is a REALLY good way to think about it, and it can lead to unexpected discoveries and 'aha' moments that seem obvious after the fact. I've heard the term 'find the fun' before as well, and I think that's similar. TLDR: Everything you're describing is super familiar to me, a veteran game developer. Even AS a veteran though, I find it useful and interesting to hear you articulate and share your problems and your steps to finding a solution. (Bonus tip for anyone wanting to get into game dev professionally - Portfolios and projects to show in an interview are important not because we want to see something revolutionary, but because we want to talk to you about your problem solving process, learn how you think and how your creativity works)
I really love this series you started. It's so easy to watch youtubers ramble about their opinions on "game design" etc. when they are just giving their opinions as game players as to what they like and don't like in games. This series really puts a lot more weight to what you are saying because the audience can see the design process actually happening.
Am I the only one so fuuucking HYYYPEDDDD about this series??! Literally every two days or so I go and check Mark's channel to see if he's uploaded anything... Keep it up! Love your work!!!
I just uploaded the first devlog for my RPG Rhythm Game, and i can say you were the one that gave me the knowledge to get through many desing issues through my development. Its really cool to see you now get into that process of decision making while lifting the weight of actually making a game. Keep up the good content!!
I love when games start with a slightly slower pace and pick it up as you go. Never leaving the the puzzle part is the right call. But I really like the idea of increasing the difficulty in platforming for a climactic second half like portal or many of my other favorite games.
I'm having the same problem with being really indecisive but in my case it extends to multiple games and projects as whole! I just can't choose which game idea to commit. But watching this video inspired me, so I think I'm going to commit to the game idea I have right now, nothing else, and make a prototype in a month. Thank you so much, Mark ❤
Hi Mark, Your adventure into game design has inspired me along a parallel path: I'm going to execute my ideas for a board game. Watching your videos in this series so far has brought up the similarities of designing video games and designing board games for me - I don't know the first thing about coding and although I might well follow down that path eventually, I'm far better right now with a set of felt-tip pens and some card stock. The prototype stage, trying out things with testers - in this case, playing the game to see if the core rules are engaging enough, challenging enough, etc - before trying to make the game in my head and stopping me from heading down the path to developing and designing the actual game are now filling me with an excitement that I haven't had for a while. Probably pandemic-related. Looking forward to the next video in this series, and indeed all your other videos. Keep up the lovely work.
You could make a puzzle game like Zelda where the puzzles are in self-contained dungeons or shrines, and you navigate between them on a platforming overworld. Or the best platforming levels could be an end-of-game setpiece, an escape sequence that tests the skills you’ve learned in the puzzles. But of course that’s if you choose to expand the project later, both ideas are a bit much for a “30 days” goal.
This is so relatable. I went down this same journey not that long ago. I watch GMTK videos to learn new things, but this ‘Developing’ series has been therapeutic. Watching you go through exactly the stuff that I did, all the frustrations, confusions and Eureka moments was empowering. Cheers Mark, thanks for sharing this journey in the most personal way possible.
Wow you encapsulated so much of my journey of the past decade. Working on new ideas, prototyping, endless analysis paralysis. I think for me shifting my expectations and comparisons to other successful indie devs has done a lot for my psyche. I try to enjoy the process of design and iteration rather than putting enormous pressure on the results produced. (although sometimes I still beat myself up for not finishing anything in 10 years of development) Your sense of game design seems very keen, I'll be excited to see whatever else you have in store for us! Thank you for for sharing your experiences!
It is so awesome to see a channel try something a bit different and then do it so well. So many channels stagnate and do the exact same formula until its stale and done to death. Trying something new with this game dev series is brave because it's so risky but I am loving this content!
Paused @ 2:02, Mark I remember playing the very old shareware title Jill of the Jungle. In that game, Jill has weapons (pair of daggers?) that she can throw and will return toward her. However, if terrain gets in the way, they will individually get blocked and fall to the local floor. When she gets close to one that has fallen it will be once again attracted to her.
Always good to set a deadline. I’ve learned that when I did SFX for TV, suddenly I had a 6 day deadline to create a mechanical/electrical and or software solution often nice dressed as prop. And you really focus on the things that need to work and be done. And it’s amazing how much you can do. Especially when you get more experienced.
Question: what if instead of giving the player different abilities, you give the player different types of magnets? Maybe some you can link together for combined effects?
I really believe that this approach would benefit this game. It would give you control over what abilities are available in any given level or section of a level, it would open the door to more easily add in new powers in future expansion, and I suspect that it would make the code more modular since you can program the character, and then just leave him alone.
ultimately he took a great lesson away from this but I was really surprised he didn't think those two levels were compatible, or mention Celeste. probably the greatest precision platformer out there is full of sliding block puzzles, and solves for people wanting to play it more like a puzzle game with assist mode
I think the real issue at hand is that this is his first real game. I think what you are suggesting could very well work. I think for him though and his situation it would be much better to just decide on if it's a platformer or a puzzle game. Him going through the process is more important than the end product itself by a hundred fold sense no matter what he does it probably won't be very good (at least when compared to other games).
@@chasefox3100 All platformers have puzzles. It would be a damn poor game if it was a platformer with no puzzles. A platformer without puzzles is basically just that Google Chrome dinosaur game that pops up when you have no internet connection. It's basically flappy bird, and he already did that. In a good platformer, your first playthrough is going through and solving all the puzzles, and then when you want to speedrun, it's figuring out - after you've already figured out how to solve all the puzzles - now how do you get through them as quickly as possible, or find ways to bypass the puzzles altogether to increase your speed. Coming to the conclusion that you can't put a puzzle in your platforming game is just completely misunderstanding the genre, and frankly getting too caught up in what genre your game is to begin with. Good games don't cater to a genre, and aren't constrained by a genre. Good games have their genre defined after they're made.
@@imnotmike again it's a terminology thing. Woth your definition all games could be described as having or being puzzle games. Genres are tools we use to categorize games. Portal has a shooting mechanic yet isn't a first person shooter while call of duty is. It's all about focus and what the point of the game is.
This series is so cool, I am really grateful that you are making it. I just have one thought about game mechanics since you are going towards the puzzle genre. I wonder if it would be an interesting mechanic to make changing polarity reliant on holding the magnet, and introduce polarity changing from a distance later in the game.
Honest to god, as a dad of a wonderful, shy and introvert 4 year old boy, I realised that I too have to see my son for who he is. I don't need and I shouldn't push him to be more outgoing or maybe even "brave". He is very lovely, thoughtful and becomes outgoing when he feels save. He is who he is and I love every minute I have with him. Thanks for a little clarity! And great series on gamedesign! I'm a developer myself, but I develop a projectmanaging App for big corps in hte buidling sector. But going into gamedevelopment is definitely a childhood dream of mine. You push me even further to start spending some time to just look into it. Great work, please keep on making your videos!
I think a large part of why it kept moving towards puzzle is that the controls were inherently focused on positioning your character, not moving your character. Separating the magnet and the character forces you to think in more complex ways about where the two are and where they’re going to move, rather than just one object, and where it’s movement flows. A platformer focuses on movement, a puzzle game forces thinking about position. I do really like the puzzle direction though! I’m just really interested now if the controls were changed so that the magnet was always attached to the character, just letting the player focus on how it swings them around. Although, that might just make it feel less like a magnet, and more like Speedrunners’ grapple hook. I dunno, that’s my random thoughts
I'm going to be honest, the idea of the character itself being magnetic seemed more interesting. I imagined it being like ikaruga but a platformer where your polarity needed to be changed frequently and creatively. Hope whatever you end up with is something you're happy with.
Nah the picking up and dropping of magnets changes the game so much. There’s only so much you can do by turning your character on and off unless they had more unique abilities. With that in mind I do like the Thor Hammer approach… just make certain walls and obstacles that it can’t be retrieved through and needs to be either manually picked up or moved around the barrier.
The other guy in reply have a point and I wanna add up that. If GMT did the original idea, he would re-invent Teslagrad and I think that would be a rather sad news for beginning dev.
THIS has hit the EXACT problem I always have when trying to make a game. I am not deciding and rather dreaming up a path that will never be taken. Thank you very much. I REALLY needed this video for my game dev journey.
3 роки тому+9
The more I watch you the more it confirms my theory that film making and game making are VERY similar. Both cover so many technical and artistic areas that the possibilities are endless, and that lack of limitations actually makes it harder when you're trying to make the whole thing without a time limit. The only two times I did something from beginning to end was when I had a deadlines (filmfest and competition). As I'm writing this the video reached minute 19 where Mark says exactly that :)
Just to clarify for some of the comments - as I state in the video, the game will have both puzzle and platforming aspects, but with puzzles as the dominant genre. The problem came from trying to have both very challenging execution-based platforming, and very challenging logic-based puzzles, and expecting players to bounce back and forth between them. I feel like this is not suitable, so had to make one dominant and the other secondary, and decided to make puzzles be dominant as that is where the game keeps swinging towards. Hope that makes sense! Things should become clearer as development goes on (I hope, for my sake)
As long as the platforming bits cut to short piece, it's OK to have many of them, as it costs little to retry, and you can still feel accomplished doing them. Just don't put a Path of Pain gauntlet in it.
Maybe looking at the Captain Toad game might help you. It has "boss fights" and other elements while still being a clear platformer.
Sounds like it will be fun!
It's a puzzle-platformer :)
Yeah, I thought that maybe the platforming levels could be a break from the challenging puzzles, but that would only work if the platforming wasn't very challenging. Perhaps you could make the platforming seem like it is challenging by making it exciting when the player has the right skills, like that level that got you excited, but just not making it really require so much precision or quickness, and having some checkpoints, so anybody can finish them. And this platforming levels could have timers and a grade or reward as an extra, not needed to progress, so the players that like fast paced action have some reason to improve, even if not so much is asked from them to complete the level.
I know this series is specifically about the process of making a game, but each video has hit me in the gut with weirdly relevant lessons about life in general
about creating in general too
Like how The Art of War has so much application outside of war
Spot on, I can't believe how much I'm personally benefitting from this series.
I completely agree. The "analysis paralysis" resonated way too much with me. Definitely going to mention this video in my next therapy session.
Mark, as always, wonderful video. Thank you so much for sharing this process with us.
Analysis Paralysis was me in Grad School. I learnt that lesson a bit later than I'd like back then.
Could be really incredible to ship a webgl version of the game that viewers can play with.
Agreed! Tinkering with mechanics is how you find inspiration- other people approach things differently, and can find different ideas
Instead of falling into the hole of "oh no it's not good enough" get lots of feedback and maybe something will inspire you
Oh hey it's the primer guy with the blobs and the education and whatnot
@@AgentNyo I think Mark has a lot of inspirations.
The problem is he has too many inspirations.
Adding new ideas will just complicate the problem.
@@williammorgan584 hehe funni blob commits evolution
Never thought of Primer being interested in Game Dev!
Funny anecdote from my school life, I was really excited when I found out that my maths teacher was playing CS in her free time.
Her comment was "Sometimes, teachers can have really interesting hobbies."
That's what I feel now, allthough Primer's science animations/simulations are closer too game dev than math is to shooters.
Some feedback/tips as a pro webdev / hobbyist gamedev:
1. 16:00 "I've talked about how I'm being indecisive about the game's genre, but if you watch me making the game in Unity these last few weeks, you'd see me being indecisive about everything. I'm constantly trying and changing and messing around with different elements and ideas as I struggle to understand the identity of this game."
You elaborate how the situation is similar to scope creep, but actually assert it is decision paralysis, illustrating the difference. And I believe your understanding of the problem is accurate; however, I would argue that the decision paralysis itself is a symptom of a deeper problem. You are finding yourself caught between not necessarily two *genres* but two (or more) gameplay experiences. How do you want a player to *feel* when they are playing the game? What emotions or thought processes do you want them to have? Then, how can you use the game's mechanic to artificially ellicit those feelings/emotions/thought processes in the player? This should be the mental workflow you take in designing the mechanics and levels, and then what mechanics you actually approve of and incorporate/finalize is built by using the above as a reference point.
You touch on this when you "converted from a platformer to a puzzler" with the changes to the camera, level design, character movement speed, jump height, and availability of mechanics. You associated gameplay experiences with the genres, effectively mapped design differences between them, and then applied them, but you never actually identified which game experience *you* wanted to deliver and then compared the traditional genres' gameplay experiences to see how well they match up or whether they were a fit for the target experience for which you are aiming.
In game design, identifying the details of this target gameplay experience is done by creating what are called the "Game Design Pillars". I think you are familiar with the term, but are experiencing the need for them first-hand. (Reminder link: orioldedios.github.io/Game-Design-Pillars/) If the pillars have been defined ahead of time, then you can almost *immediately* ascertain whether a potential mechanic or level design will contribute toward or degrade the game's acceleration toward those pillars. As you are brainstorming and experimenting with various ideas (which is good!), you must also be able to quickly determine if the idea actually helps or not - and then, if not, is there some alteration you could make to the concept that would enable it to rejoin the other pillar-aligned ideas you've developed thus far. If no version of the idea can be made that actually aligns with the projects vision/pillars, then it has to be scrapped, no matter how much it is liked or how much effort was put in to it ("Kill Your Darlings").
The advice you received from Oliver about enforcing constraints on devtime is just an artificial means of forcing oneself to make a decision regarding the pillars in order to empower you to breach through the decision paralysis.
So, genres confer expectations of particular emotional experiences which means they have a specific subset of pillars to which they expect a game to conform. That is, the emotional experiences are expressions of the game's pillars. Your process thus far is to start with mechanics and work backward towards genre (all the while not targeting the pillars behind them). This has led to a feeling of directorial confusion. What I would recommend and challenge you to do is come at it from the other direction where you clearly outline *what* it is you want to build, and then let that guide your path for which mechanics will best support creating that experience. Then, whatever "genre" is associated with the game will just naturally fall into place by virtue of how closely the chosen pillars/mechanics align with said genre(s). This is, in fact, how *new* genres are made. Someone invents a game with some combination of pillars for which there is no popular term, and thus, a new genre name is made for it.
2. 19:08 "I'd look at, like, what are the core things you need to make this game you are envisioning...we usually talk about an MVP, minimal viable product."
The methodology Oliver is advocating for is something that has a proper term in software engineering which is "Agile" (with which you are also likely familiar). You put an emphasis on developing iterative deliverables that are fully playable/usable and which provide concrete value to the end-product. Then, at the end of the "sprint", you reflect on how things are going, get feedback from your audience, outline a list of things that need doing (changes to the design, tasks to complete, etc.), assign priorities to each of those tasks, and then pick the next subset of tasks which you think you can accomplish in the next "sprint". The most popular manifestation of the agile mindset is the "Scrum" methodology.
Hope this info helps! Loving the videos so far, and I really appreciate your ability to communicate the gamedev experience to a broader audience like this. :-D
Very good answer 👍
I hope he'll see it
Some of your words definitely inspired me, like the whole "How new genres are born" thing. Good stuff right here.
Man, this is a far better and more concrete way of saying the garbage that I spewed in my comment. It's also helped clear up some doubts I've had about my own project as well. I really appreciate you for taking the time to write this out!
Yeah, he has so many decisions that are undecided because he has an idea, not a vision(deaign pillars).
Thank you for sharing your advice, this was comprehensive, practical and inspirational all at the same time. I really enjoyed reading what u had to say!
There’s something that I’ve come to realize over the years: pretty much *every* game is a puzzle game in some form or another. That high-speed platformer level you made is also a puzzle - you have to figure out the order to use your abilities to get where you want to go.
That isn't actually meaningful or helpful to game design or anything really. It's a tautology of sorts. Games don't play themselves and so require the player to do something.
Second point is that a call of duty is so difficult from bejeweled that it isn't even comparable anymore. Or take doom and portal. They both have "shooting" but are so different from one another that calling them both shooters is disingenuous and doesn't capture the reality of the situation.
This is an interesting idea. City-builders are puzzles (how do I fix traffic?). Roguelikes are puzzles (what combination of resources, resource management, and good RNG will make a successful run?). Simulations are puzzles (where do I place X to maximize its benefit?). RPGs are puzzles (what combination of skill points, abilities, and party members will work best?). Strategy games are puzzles (how do I maximize my start location? which build/techs/units do I go for?) Action-adventure games are puzzles (I have these weapons and abilities; how can I use these against an enemy's weak points or AI patterns?).
I mean thats basically what games are. Games create a virtual environment and present problems that you need to find a solution to. If a "game" doesn't have any puzzles, or problem solving elements to it, it wouldn't be called a game, it would be called a toy or sth like that.
That's called a problem. Gaming is problem solving.
The “platforming” level is a puzzle already, you’d have to figure out the solution rather than just playing through it. It just happens that the solution to the puzzle requires fluid, platforming like movement but there was really no need to remove it
Very true. I could see a puzzle and platforming levels selected on the main screen.
Or just combine them in a meaningful way and with properly paced progression
Maybe, but the skill to do those movements might be difficult for a puzzle oriented player imo
@@NoahStolee Portal is actually a puzzle game which all of the sudden has these fast-paced extreme platformer puzzles. I think it can be done.
That's exactly what I thought. An occasional change of pacing simply brought by level design doesn't completely change its genre nor target audience. But I agree to what's said in the video, you can't have half of one and half of the other or it will feel weird. The change needs to be justified within the game, and it can only work for a cinematic game, with enemies suddenly pursuing you for instance, or on the contrary slower special areas.
Portal is the same
“Scrap all those old levels, we’re doing this now” - spoken like a true gamedev
that line gives me chills
I'm really impressed by the level of personal sharing and reflection in these videos! These are such common things in the process of creation and they're communicated so well here.
Yes, this sort of issue is probably the biggest things that stops newbies from going further in their creation and it's the first time I've seen someone talk about it.
I also noticed that he’s doing a remarkable job keeping the video interesting and well paced without getting bogged down in details but not loosing all the detail too, inferno plus often hits this problem in his game mods dev videos but he also has a problem with scope creep
I also think he's doing a great job of communicating how he plans to tackle these obstacles, with advice (such as set an arbitrary time limit) that is widely applicable to a variety of creative projects!
I have to agree these videos are amazing! And the process as documented here is very interesting
second
The only times I have ever finished a game has been in game jams.
Constraints fuel creativity. The problem most everyone has even in game jams isn't that they don't have any ideas. Instead it's usually paralysis because they have the world of possibilities that need to be narrowed down to one idea.
Also, ideas are never as important as implementation.
I've only ever participated in a single game jam. It was Ludum Dare about 2 years ago. I spent the whole time learning to model, weight paint, rig, and animate a character. The game I uploaded was a small platform with a Naruto running character.
Inspired, thanks. Been planning my first game soon a year now. Doing documentations. And I thought of narrow it down when I get that far. Thanks for the words. Doing simpler projects before that game though.
You don't need to narrow everything down to one idea though. There's plenty space for many.
If I can share one bit of wisdom that helps me in such situations:
"Compromise on Details, but never on Vision" - or said differently: Pick a vision, when a decision needs to be made, make the one that supports the vision and throw away the one that doesn't - no matter which one is cooler. It's a sort of constraint outside of the domain of time.
another version of this is "kill your darlings." don't keep an element around solely because you like it, or you'll sacrifice the overall quality. to create an incredible game, everything must serve the whole.
lol Ah yes the inevitable "I changed something and now it's just a puzzle game" trap that every new developer falls into.
Veteran developers too! My favorite puzzle game, The Talos Principle, was created during the development of a Serious Sam game, an FPS. A dev created a "jamming" tool that turned obstacles off, and bam, inspired the company to make a puzzle game instead.
Game design abhors a vacuum and everything that isn't a puzzle game
Sounds like the game development analog to carcinization in evolutionary biology.
Made a very simple platformer in C++ because I was bored at work. Turns out, It's basically just a puzzle game about movement because a grid based platformer is really all that C++ can manage.
The game has really fun collision though. Since there's no "grounded" state and there's no hit detection unless your character is in the obstacle (it then pushes you out, grants you an extra jump, and/or might have some effect on your velocity based on what you ran into and repeats until it finds a valid position for you to exist).
Leads to a bunch of weird movement tech. Like, being able to fall through the ground if your speed is high enough. Clipping up through the ground if you can jump into it. Walls being scalable by repeatedly jumping and then walking inside them. Pillars of cellings sucking you down and out their bottom if you touch them (I call it quicksand). Also, the air control and lack if collision allows you to fall through huge piles of ground if there are enough gaps.
The irony is, I think, that the very skillset that makes you so effective as a critic and in-depth analyzer of games; is the same skillset that makes it hard for you to create something. Because you're used to deconstructing, your instincts will actually drag you away from completion rather than towards it.
Exactly .that’s what I was thinking while watching it
That's not very true, anyone who made any game would tell u that they had similar struggles, but with time and practice they eventually get better at it.
Even though he makes videos about games all the time, that doesn't mean making games for him will be easier or harder, at the of the day, Evey game developer went through the same struggles
This feels pretty astute to me. I'm a professional editor (text, not video), so I'm good at analyzing writing, picking it apart, seeing what works and what doesn't, suggesting possible revisions, etc. But "analysis paralysis" basically describes my life. I can see and weigh alternatives and their pros and cons all day. But making an actual, permanent decision is terrifying to me.
How is Milo 2?
You could add a magnet dispenser at various points where you need the player to have a magnet. That way you could keep your platformer design while ensuring that the player will have a magnet when needed, and not have the magnet recall functionality force the magnet to go through walls or otherwise not act like a magnet.
It could actually be incorporated into the story of the game. For some reason the dispensers start to become scarce until there are no more (or maybe the player encounters the last magnet or a special one) and so they have to learn the ability to call the magnet over so that they can keep going.
you could have an etherial magnet.
why would it be solid ?
be like link in botw
@@metalicarus8372 because he wanted to avoid that inconsistency
@@dbokser that's dumb
Okay, but what if the character *was* a magnet dispenser? Like, a little robot wearing a mechanical backpack that pops out magnets. You start with two abilities: throwing the magnet, and remotely destroying the magnet. Like, just have it detonate like a mine (this could also be made to double as an attack). You can also only have one magnet onscreen at once, so in order to produce a new magnet you have to detonate the one you just threw. As you progress through the game, you periodically get upgrades that increase the number of magnets you can have onscreen by one. You can also only detonate your magnets in the order you spawned them, a limitation that lends itself naturally to interesting puzzle design. You later get the ability to change the magnets' polarity, but you can only change it for *all* of the onscreen magnets at once (though only the ones you have thrown, not the one you're currently holding), which again, opens the door to some interesting and tricky puzzles. This eliminates the need for a "recall" ability and really opens up the gameplay a lot, I feel. You can also add a function later on that lets you detonate *all* thrown magnets at once or gives you a toggle which, when activated, makes all magnets automatically detonate soon after you let go of them, which effectively allows the gameplay to shift freely between freer platforming segments and more constrained puzzle stages, since automatic detonation makes the magnet supply function like a cooldown meter for your magnet-based platforming abilities.
As a games design student, I can already see the value of my course here. They've already talked to us about this and I've had the chance to explore most of these problems and issues on my own (AND I'VE BEEN ON THE COURSE FOR 3 MONTHS), making game prototypes. There is a huge amount of projects due, but these videos really helped me see the value behind my course and why it is SO important to stick to it. So thank you!
I’m sure he’s already got so much of this done in advance, but I could see these concepts becoming a really cool puzzle/Metroidvaina, which is a spin on both genres that hasn’t really been seen before. You solve different puzzles in areas to progress, finding new abilities as you go along which help you solve more puzzles, and maybe even get those BoTW flashes of agency where you use your nonlinear assortment of power ups to complete a puzzle in your own uniquely clever way. Unraveling ZDR or Hallownest is already a bit of a puzzle in and of itself, so making the navigation focus on puzzles instead of combat could be really cool.
This is a super great idea- it’d add loads of unique flavour to the unlocks, and it would work with a fusion of platforming and puzzle elements. It’d also serve to reintroduce the idea of combat and enemies as problems to solve into the game.
The major risk here is pulling a bait and switch on the player. If the game wants to end as a big bombastic platformer but starts as a plodding puzzler, players may get put off as the platformer complexity rises. So Mark would have to continuously remind the player that isn't a hard platformer, but with only a fraction of the tools.
A great example of the bait and switch problem is Brutal Legend. Shafer set out to build an RTS on console. It was the primary mechanic he wanted to explore and base the game around. But they started the game as a brawler, due to the idea that you were supposed to be part of the RTS army, not just a commander. So you spend the first 10 hours playing before the RTS mechanics are introduced. When they are first brought in, they are just companions that can be commanded, so players will go business as usual. The RTS gameplay slowly starts to take over, and eventually you can't just brawl your way through fights. So the game ends frustratingly as you now have all the cool brawler moves unlocked, but you're better off just commanding the army. It leaves the player with a huge letdown as the game closes out.
This is the scope creep he was talking about xD
Oh, MAN, puzzle metroidvenia.... KOLM, but with harder puzzles, yes please.
This is honestly such a cool idea and I would love to play a game like this, but i think it would be really difficult to design, especially puzzles that have multiple solutions based on non-linear progression, but if it could be done that would be amazing
Im a Dutch student enrolling in game design technology study and a course for production management. The university literally sourced you as a good starting point for the portfolio assignment for people who don't have a lot of experience. Im seriously impressed by how interesting each new video is. You never repeat yourself and each topic is unique but equally interesting. Im glad I found this channel
Answering the question of what genre your game should be is a trap, don't do it just follow the fun. Genres are poorly defined categorization systems for consumers to find games similar to ones they already know they like. They should not be a set of limitations that you intentionally put on yourself as a designer. Game design is a creative field, you should only be putting limitations on yourself to instigate creative solutions
Well put.
I feel like this is a trap people also fall into a lot in fiction too. Tropes are to analyze *post-mortem*, not to create around.
They also tend to have genre and medium confused
Yep! “Genres” are for marketing and advertising.
Mte!
Great point, it was so interesting that as Mark thought about which of the two genres the game would be, he had this idea about what he was "allowed" to include, like only a puzzler could include certain things or only a platformer could include certain things. I actually felt visceral discomfort at that part of the video (about 5 mins in) and needed to rewatch to realize that that feeling was me going "why?" to the either/or of it all.
just a thought - the nice feeling platforming level could be classified as a timing puzzle level in my opinion. Same old portal had a couple of levels that were different in dynamics and revolving more around getting the right timing. I found them really nice.
"Puzzle Platformer" is a thing, could try and find a medium...
And, heck, a lotta speedrunning is akin to puzzle solving for faster solutions next run.
Puzzles AS fast, essentially. Rather than as opposite ends of a spectrum.
speedrun puzzle platformers is a niche genre (mostly some mario maker levels) which i love and it brought great pain to watch him reject puzzle platformers
every game is a puzzle game
....to some degree
The moment a magnet was added it became a puzzle game.
The moment a player that can run around and jump on platforms was added it became a platformer game.
What I would suggest is focus on making the best/most intuitive levels in the given time, rather than overthinking about genre.
The platforming+puzzle level at 9:45 was absolutely brilliant in my opinion.
Anyways, its just my opinion, I am noob too, so what do I know hehe
"It turns out that game development is just full of these tiny unforseen microdecisions to make" resonated with me hard because that's what writing fiction is like too. You think you've got it sorted if you know the basic plot points but you keep being ambushed by things like "Wait, how much firewood can a single person carry and how many logs of firewood does one night require?"
Okay, I'm 99% percent sure that you were talking about writing a novel and not D&D stuff but I'm gonna talk about this anyway cause it made me think of this.
SO much of what's been talked about in these videos I think would be really useful for writing D&D campaign as, like you are mentioning with writing fiction, I often mind myself getting caught up in really random details (normally far off, irrelevant but really cool lore ideas) that really don't matter that much. Meanwhile, the actual adventure that the players will be playing is neglected and doesn't turn out all that well. Other DM's have seconded me on this as well.
I feel like the process of making a Minimum Viable Product could actually be very helpful for DM's as then you can get the barebones of absolutely required stuff done first (*cough cough* the actual adventure), and can add on little nuggets of extra relevant details after. Only really worrying about the whole overarching story when it's convenient or an opportunity presents itself.
Sorry for the long and kinda irrelevant reply but just though I would share some of my thoughts.
Have a good day!
The curse of writing with an analytical view, constantly asking yourself "But why/how tho" after every single new creation
The worst part is not the why/how after every little detail the problem is the final why/how when you “end” because it makes you so insecure that you want to overwrite everything or just give up on that one and write a new one. I dont write stories but as a programmer this happens me often.
@@remarkablysquare3216 Using "minimal viable product" as a DM sounds like a really good idea actually!
@@JudinA Thanks! Do you play D&D at all?
Man, this series just feels so relatable to me, and I'm trying to draw as much inspiration from your journey as I can to fuel my own stumbling journey.
Can we just take a second to appreciate Olivers willingness to openly share his knowledge on game design. He could perfectly be adversarial and secretive about his work, yet he is so forthcoming and helpful towards his peers. He seems like a great guy!
Oliver is a really cool guy. Worked with him in the past. Awesome chap.
While he seems like a solid dude, there isn't anything deep about his advice. It's very much the agile working method, which 90% of developers are familiar with (which doesn't mean they all work that way, but at least they're familiar with it).
And not just Oliver but most game devs I've known. Everyone is so open and supportive. The fact that publicly listed for-profit corporations are still sharing their secret sauces at GDC is a testament to how deep the collaborative spirit runs in this industry.
@@libiroli I can't speak to digital games as much, but I've noticed that there's a lot more camaraderie than there is competition among tabletop game designers. In the case of tabletop there's not a lot of money in the industry unless you have a hugely popular breakout title so people tend to do the work out of a deep passion for the hobby. Most designers are fans first, competitors second, and everyone wants to help each other succeed because they want more great games to play. I could see there being a similar case for indie digital games.
Went to the same upper secondary school as Oliver, and he really was one of my closest friends back then. He was already studying game development and was really wonderful as a person. We hung out a lot during those three years before graduation and then sorta went different ways, but seeing him work together with someone like Mark is just really touching. It makes me happy to see that not only is he working with someone that we discussed even back then, but that he's actually in that field now.
I have worked on a lot of my own creative projects over the years. One thing I have found helps is to just write down all of the ideas you have, what you were thinking about when you came up with the idea, and why you like it and just file it away in a place you can find later for when you inevitably have writers block.
I like the idea of all these different magnets that work differently and you could definitely include more of the later. You could just find different magnets in different levels, but that is not something you want to worry about now especially in the prototype phase, just tuck those ideas away for later.
I don't think platformers need to be devoid of puzzle solving. One game he looked at for inspiration was Celeste which is admittedly mainly a platformer, but has specific sections where on your first go you really need to sit down and think about how you're going to do what you need to with your limited amount of stamina and dashes (particularly in the challenge levels, but in the main game too). On top of all of that it's still difficult and satisfying to execute on the plan you've made offering replayability if so desired.
^ Seconding this. Celeste, even in its basic levels, is a puzzle-platformer. As well as the things you mention, like dash conservation & stamina, even basic platforming is a puzzle. This becomes particularly obvious in the 4th stage where the direction you dash is often the difference between being able to complete the level or not. Movement itself is a puzzle.
Additionally, it has the same puzzle-game mindset of "constrained solutions", for a first-time player there is often only 1 or 2 correct path through a level (before you learn any advanced techniques - which add replay value).
I think it is interesting from a puzzle-game perspective, because you never know if you have the correct solution; if you fail you don't know whether its because your method was wrong or because you aren't good enough. In a way, this solves the problem of players being able to brute force solutions to the level without solving the underlying problem (common in ace attorney). Many levels are impossible to complete with superficial understanding alone. However, it introduces the problem of players being stuck in dead ends, where they have no chance of succeeding with their method but they can never prove that it's flawed.
There are also sections of the End is Nigh, particularly some of the tumors, that kind of stump you for a minute as you reach for a solution achievable within the character's moveset.
Something I've always found usefull when working on more experimental games like yours is to decide on a theme for the game. The theme can be anything really, but should generally be something abstract and unrelated to games. Like. One against many, or the future is bleak just to name two. The theme can be a really good beacon to move towards when you have two equally good paths forward, just ask yourself which one best represents your theme.
The theme can then influence everything from art style, story and even control schemes, tying the whole product together.
Great video as always!
I think you're overlooking how many platformers have puzzle elements. I've heard many people while playing Celeste say that each level has two components - figuring out how to beat it, and then the execution of it.
Celeste is a platformer first and puzzle second, so the execution tends to be the more difficult aspect, but to switch the genre to "puzzle first, platformer second", I think you could just switch the difficulty. Make figuring out the solution hard, and the execution as a medium difficulty.
I would be interested in hearing what others think of this idea.
that's my experience with celeste. I think of it a bit like building combos in a fighting game. Each room in celeste puts you in a situation where you need to find out the correct series of inputs through a mix of game knowledge and trial and error, then execute them perfectly.
In fact Celeste is so puzzly that my first playthrough took 10 hours, the second only 2 (because I knew how to solve the rooms), and that was without any special speedrunning tech.
Exactly, I was also thinking of Celeste, he should definitely keep the momentum going in that direction!
Exactly. That's why people who say "well Portal has both" are wrong in my opinion, because at least Portal 2 has the execution part very easy. Just because you move fast it doesn't mean it needs great skills.
17:13 The process described here is creating the map of your available options.
In my opinion, a map like this one is the most important things to have when working on the game.
If you don't know your options, what options lead to what consequences, what is the price of each option, etc - you are going to be making the game while being blind.
At this point, you are pretty much at the hands of luck.
Either your gut feeling was correct and the set of your design decisions works well together by a happy incident, or it is not, and then all the resources you spent are wasted.
And the video games are among the most resource consuming projects.
It's easy to spend a year or more and realise you just have to scrap it.
Obviously it's necessary to move forward somehow and make decisions at some point.
But neglecting the exploration process is not a good way to do that, in my opinion.
Just want to throw it in, if you like.
You can lose magnets at the beginning of the level. For example, Use a magnet to climb to a platform and then leave the magnet to proceed with the level. You can supply a magnet where necessary or the level design can tell the player if they need to carry this magnet to the next level.
Give the magnet a little diversity. Red magnets are normal magnets you know stick to the surface. Blue magnets can be recalled. Yellow magnets can change to the player will. To get around the problem of the difference between Red and Yellow magnets, give the blue magnet a fixed time in which it will return to you.
Give the magnet a power level. You can recall the magnet but if the magnet is strong enough it will pull you. Do something interesting with it then.
Give the ability to reverse the polarity of a tractor beam to use it as a trampoline.
Not the brightest ideas. But nothing to lose in sharing.
I know this is an older video that I'm catching up on, but I want to thank you for the honesty or your struggles with this project. I've been a game developer for just over 10 years now and I've seen ALL of these struggles in my work and myself throughout my career. Thanks for showing more people that game development is difficult (but very rewarding).
Currently it sounds like your game could be a lot like VVVVVV, its a platformer with plenty of puzzle screens that are a bit more optional. It’s about narrow, repeatable platforming challenges that are somewhat puzzle like.
Similarly, a Metroidvania format could suit this game. It gradually introduces new elements like you need and optional sections are great for sneaking in puzzles.
Call it Magtroid
a metroidvania would be very cool but literally the exact opposite of the lesson in this video about scope creep lol
VVVVVV
I thought of VVVVVV too. The part where you have to "jump" through multiple screens and be very exact just to jump back instantly when you reach the top and get the way back is so wild, it reminded me a little to the level he designed here.
I just want to say I'm SO GLAD you're making a game! No offense and I love your content; it's very insightful, especially for someone who hasn't made a game, but it's important to have gone through the process (and over and over, actually), to REALLY understand game design. It's one of the reasons I get so touchy when people call developers "lazy" or say "it's easy" or even ignore me, when I try to tell them about how each decisions affects 10k other elements in the game. I really think EVERYONE should have to make a game in school. It should be compulsory, so that everyone can understand and have a bit more respect for their favorite hobby. Keep going, it's all about learning!
This video is extremely insightful, and analysis paralysis is DEFINITELY something I don't hear talked about often that I fell into so many times. I feel like it is just as important as scope creep, and forcing ourselves to continue is good to push us further.
Your videos always strike me with how polished they are in total. Your work in general has become a reference for me, the writing in special. I struggle to make a podcast series for the place where I work, a center of studies in humanities, and GMTK, now this series in special, is a constant inspiring voice. Many thanks, Mike
Honestly I think you're getting too hung up on the idea that the puzzle and platformer concepts are in conflict. You mention puzzle platformer at the end, and that seems to be pretty obviously what this is to me, and I don't think the two main levels you showed are at odds there. It seems to me Iike a puzzle platformer has the best of both worlds, and I think it's 1000% fine to have some levels that are a bit more puzzley, and others that are a bit more platformy! My instinct would be just to make lots of levels, see what feels fun, and then put them in an order that makes sense afterwards
Agreed. Games need pacing, and the best platformers have a mix of "run run run go go go" type levels and "tread careful now! slooooly" levels. Puzzles are one way to change pace, fighting/combat mechanics are another. He seems too concerned with choosing the right recipe rather than creating his own.
Had the same thought. For example Half life switches between action and puzzle (and narrative) throughout to help with pacing and give the player a break
Plus isn't Celeste exactly in this genre ? I had to use my thinking power quite a bit to figure out the route sometimes
@@Mark_LaCroix And speedrunners are going to do the slower levels in some crazy quick way as well, unless you specifically design it to be impossible.
I agree with all these statements especially that of pacing, but we have to keep in mind he’s one person and has to limit his scope and vision.
He’s proven he can go either way, but doing so also increases the complexity of the project. He may not want that. His deadline will make sure he can at least get to a finish line and see an end result.
really love Oliver's strategy, and it also helps define a loose structural way to incorporate different mechanics and eventually even a story arc. If you can make 5 levels for 5 different mechanics, you have 5 "worlds" that guide your character's progress, and you can introduce story elements to explain the changes. I keep thinking about Earthworm Jim and how he could detach his head to use it as a weapon, and it seems like something similar here would 1) tie you back to your original idea of the magnet-head, 2) provide some immediately funny character design/animations, and 3) provide a guiding principle to movement through the game (ie. you can't finish a level without your head, ability to switch out heads while limiting skillsets, etc.). Either way, absolutely love seeing the developments here and your openness about these choices being a struggle!
Braid is an interesting example, though. One of the great strengths of Braid is how each world is a different spin on the same core idea. Mechanics don't stack like powerups in Braid; they're introduced, explored, and then dropped. The different magnet concepts talked about in this video could totally work like that. The indecision could be a feature instead of a bug, if done right.
I think that's probably better for a sequel, rather than for this specific project. For now, I think it's better to focus on creating a finished game, rather than to create a game with lots of features.
This video series is an essential tool in a game maker's toolkit.
There are lots of videos about the technical stuff on programming and design. Lots of videos about how game mechanics, UI, and other elements work together to enhance (or detract from) the player's experience. Lots of videos about the player's psychology when it come to gameplay loops, problem solving, and other thoughts. And lots and lots and lots of videos that say a lot of stuff but tell you very little.
But there are very few videos about the real process of creating a game from scratch to finish. There's so much psychology about the game maker's themselves that isn't as easily accessible. What's it actually like to create a game? How do you make all the decisions? What happens when you take all information you can find from other sources and put it into practice? What happens in each step of the process? How do you discover and navigate the pitfalls? Those are the things this series brings forth. Those are the things that make this series unique.
Or maybe there are lots of videos about all of that too, in channels I'm not aware of.
from the first few minutes, it seems like a mixture of a puzzle game and a platformer would be the best option
like elechead?
Making two different campaigns is another solution. Or splice in fast paced platforming levels inbetween the puzzles to break up the slow pace a bit.
I love the puzzle + platform combo, I really disagree with the decision to cut one of them because the game is heavy on physics and has great potential for puzzles so having both would be the greatest of both worlds
yeah, they could complement each other. People who love platformers like celeste or elechead, and especially celeste farewell, do understand the games are clustered with puzzles
And again, repeating puzzles is not too much of a bad thing. You could repeat it so as to reinforce mechanics while adding on more puzzles that build upon the puzzles
@@IgorJCorrea exactly
Your self awareness in this series really helps this serve as a guide to processing through, rather than 'trying to avoid' (which never works) some of the most ubiquitous problems in game development. Rather than telling people what to avoid this does a great job of talking through an experience that others can identify with and recognize in their own work, so that hopefully when they catch themselves stuck they've already followed you walking through the problem here, to know how to do it for their situation.
Bravo!
I feel like while fun, puzzle platforms can get a bit repetitive at times. Those more fast paced rooms seem like a great way to add some sort of frequent intermission to keep the player engaged
This is gold. Your other videos are good of course, but these series has so far perhaps been more useful than all your other videos together. You are putting my own problems into words, defining what they are, why they are hard to overcome, and on top of that, you present a solution on how to overcome them, in a simple, straightforward way. This is fantastic!
Thank you
A lot of these issues you are having with indecision are usually solved by gaming studios because they have a huge group working as a team, maybe it will help you to have someone to bounce ideas off of so you can step out of your own head a little bit.
Mark, just wanted to say, this is such a great series and I'm really enjoying joining your through the game making process. It adds a lot of real world / examples to theoretical ideas I've heard bantered around (e.g. minimum viable product, analysis paralysis, etc.) Thanks for inviting us along!
I think this video perfectly illustrates the strengths of an agile approach to game development (as well as to most other creative tasks). So many good ideas (if not most of the best ones) come during the process of actually working on your creative project, all of which would be lost if you chose the traditional software development approach of first doing all the planning, then doing all the developing, then doing all the bug-fixing etc. However, if you choose the iterative approach Mark lays out in these videos-building small prototypes, getting new ideas, building a better and bigger prototype etc.-you can harness all the good ideas that come in the process.
I totally agree. I don't make games but I draw little comics for fun, and my goodness, a lot of final decisions come from hiding mistakes / laziness / constraints under the carpet and then bending everything else around that. And that's not bad practice that's legitimate, it's how creating art works. I used to have all these video game ideas that I'd think they are pure gold, but turns out,
an idea is: a kick in the butt to start creating something arbitrary.
If I started creating a video game based off of one of those ideas... I'd just be making some videogame. Sooomething. Independently from what the original idea was. That's the best case scenario!
This is exactly what I was thinking. It draws from the psycological idea of the "implementation intention", which is basivally the psycological term for making something SMART. Decide what you want to do and when you want it to be done.
Thank you once again for making your way into my UA-cam feed, and once again reigniting the spark in my love for this industry and a project I keep losing sight of!
Mark, just wanna let you know that I've been following your channel for the longest time and this is by far the best series you've done. As interesting as your design analysis are, seeing you grasping with actual, more mundane design challenges feels a lot more insightful. I think you struck gold with this series and format, so please keep doing it!
Absolutely one of your best videos in the "GMTK developing" series yet. This one is so informative, tackles common new dev problems and mental blocks but I particularly like the mental process and decision making, the "why" you made a decision, the reasoning behind it and reflecting on why this became an issue to begin with. Love it, keep em coming man.
This series is absolutely enthralling to watch. Your videos on the theory and principles of game design have always been top notch, but seeing you work through the difficulties of creative design is inspirational. I can't wait for the next installment of Developing.
Hey Mark, I’m a long time GMTK watcher and a first time UA-cam commenter. I am currently taking a video game storytelling course in college and have been adjusting my focus in class projects to the development side of games, solely because of this series. I just wanted to say how inspiring I find your recent venture into an unknown creative world, and I am tuned in for every update. Anyways, I wrote this comment to tell you that I love the idea of including magnetic fields’ effects in your projectile beam. Messing around with how the lines will curve and flip based on magnetic fields the player has control over is a fascinating game mechanic. I wish the best for you and cannot wait to play your finished game.
Great video as always!
But also here's me, a game developer, scratching my head a little about what's wrong with having these two levels together? They seem totally fine to me! The game requires platforming literacy, so it's never going to be a pure puzzler. And it's also already too complex for a twitch platformer in the vein of Super Meat Boy. Thankfully, puzzle platformers are a thing ;).
In this kind of setup, you use slow levels to establish new mechanics and possible puzzle segments in a controlled environment, letting the player figure out all the interactions without any time pressure. Then you introduce the element of execution with tighter and tighter opportunity windows (see Braid or Portal). Intertwining slower head-scratchers and twitchy gamepad-breakers also helps with the pacing and gives you more tools for designing further stages without having to figure out something completely new every time.
All in all, I'd say it's too early to worry about the identity of the game or kill your darlings. It's still a basic prototype, so go with the flow and make...whatever really. Only once you've got several levels that can be played in a row, you'll be able to tell how it all gels together and what works best long-term. It may well turn out that your slower puzzle level is a nice change of pace in an otherwise twitchy game. Or vice versa. :)
Aside from the self-imposed deadline, which I think is a great idea, my advice would be to limit the time you iterate on a level to nearly zero. Once it's playable, it's done, has to be placed in the game, and can't be chaged further during this "milestone". This should help with the analysis paralysis a bit.
Good luck with this! I'm very much looking forward to the rest of the series!
I feel like a lot of those ideas that you felt you were getting caught up with could all work in the same product, rather than being obstacles - for instance, it could be a physics-based puzzle-platformer where you can drag objects to and from you, as well as there being stuff that could get dragged to by holding the magnet, and you could differentiate between them by size, or color, or some other visual cues. The best puzzle-platformers have lots of mechanics that all work with each other and mesh well with our personal understanding of physics and whatnot. That said, I agree scope creep can be a problem, so you ought to come up with a defined beginning and end that are good enough before adding more to the heap.
I still remember the first time I made my own prototype and showed it to my friends and family for playtesting years ago. We made some little questionnaires for feedback and passed them out. The pride of my own work, the regret of not doing it better, the anxiety of people not liking the game. What you talked in the video hits so closed to home.
Well researched as always, but I see that you’re taking inspiration from a lot of bigger budget industry games. For these kind of puzzle platformers, you need look no further than your own game jams. Soulward and Out of sight, out of mind comes to mind when you were describing your levels and both were excellent in short and concise levels. Especially how the gem in soulward blocks damage when you’re carrying them, perhaps could be a fun mechanic with the magnet too?
For the recalling method, my first instinct was actually to give player two magnets of opposite polarity and the player can use one to call back another or throw both of them out. But that might be too complicated depends on the implementation.
Also, don’t worry about genre too much. When Hideo Kojima was asked what genre Death Stranding is, he simply answered that it is the strand type game. I love how he refused to be confined in one set genre. Perhaps the same could apply to you too? Just make a “magnet type game” and I’m sure a lot of people will enjoy it. Wish you all the best and we’re all looking forward to your progress.
This is one of my favorite devlogs I’ve ever watched. Made me excited to work on my own game. Super excited to see more!
"I feel like I've hit on some interesting formulas and techniques for making good puzzles"
Step 1: Attempt to make a platforming level.
Step 2: Success
What i love about these videos is the authenticity. I have never seen a game development video that acknowledges and owns all the problems he describes. I want to develop games once my kids are older, and it's easy to think that you are the only game designer who struggles with these problems. Much appreciated Mark.
My advice is to make the game YOU want to make. The most common reason I have for dropping projects has been straying away from what I wanted to make in favour of what the projects should logically have been.
This. Making what the game "should be" is a trap that can prevent you from doing something unconventional and unique.
This series of you making your own game and the lessons you've learnt a long the way is both very entertaining and educational, amazing content.
As a DM who very often gets caught up in the weeds when writing an adventure, the Minimum Viable Product approach sounds very helpful. Thanks for the great video!
Great video! It's really interesting to see this "personal" side of game development. Also I respect your "kill your darlings" attitude, that would probably be the part I'd fail at.
What if the player had all abilities at the start, but they weren't told about it yet? I'm thinking about your video on Toki Tori 2. If you had a game that was a puzzle game at the start, but had speedrun-esque alternate solutions, then you could truly have both.
I'm just starting out as well, it's really inspiring to have someone else's journey to follow.
This could backfire. For example, in Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, you have access to all your combat skills, but you're only gradually taught said skills.
Playing through the game a second time, knowing all the combat skills, I quickly lost interest and didn't end up finishing my second play through.
@@gowzahr Fair point. I guess the question is, would it be more, or less repayable? I replay Portal every now and then, but haven't touched Baba is You after playing through once. Honestly, I feel like "What makes a puzzle game repayable" is the kind of question I'd be interested in seeing a video on. My current guess is that player skill and mastery makes me want to come back to a game.
Like other commenters have said, even fast, fluid, speed-runnable platformers like Celeste or Ori are simply puzzles in which you need to figure out-often through trial and error-which combinations of jumps, timings, and abilities will get you through a level. Once you figure the puzzle out, they just require you to complete the puzzle quickly in one go.
Both levels you made are puzzles. One just requires you to input the steps to solve it while moving.
Go with High Speed Puzzle Platformer… it’s more unique than just sticking to one of the two and isn’t too much to chew.
Also Thor Hammer recall is something that should be unlockable. You can make it work by only having certain walls it can be retrieved through so no issues with collision and your other concerns.
The thing with high speed puzzles is that most puzzle game players (like myself) don't want puzzles to rely on accurate mechanical execution, whereas platformers rely on precisely that for smooth and challenging gameplay. the two genres don't mix as well as you'd imagine. Of course the game would be very interesting with both genres combined, but interesting and clever doesn't always equal fun.
MVP is a great piece of advice. I've seen game prototypes where everything was just different coloured cubes (table was one colour, NPC was another colour, player was colour 3, etc, etc, etc) for example, while the finished game had proper models, and very simplified mechanics. It's great to just see how well the idea works.
20:15 Haha, that's amazing! I started a 30 day challenge about a month ago. Same thing: 30 days, with breaks, learn all about game design. Best of luck with it!
This is perhaps my favorite ever GMTK video. Oh, the existential struggle of game development!
I love how you describe this creative bumper car journey of design, experimenting, reflection, re-adjusting, etc, etc. :D
This reminds of this time I had a conversation with someone at work. I've been working on a game for nine years and somehow my friend convinced me to just get something done. I decided that day I would release the game to the internet in a week from then no matter what. My end goal was to just have something presentable, and that was it. I could have pushed it back another week, but I really cut a lot of corners and got something done.
Mark, I'm glad that you experienced something that I had to learn the hard way. It's funny that I'm back in the same situation as you were (again) trying to figure out what to do next. I think its time I set some more deadlines.
The issues and experiences you're having echo my journey so much. It is a real struggle sometimes, but keep it up man! Great work!
So fun to see the progress of this project, especially as someone making a puzzle platformer :)
Congratulations, you're doing it! Your constant questioning and experimentation is a core process in game development! I am LOVING how you are documenting these problems and your PROCESS of moving through and beyond them. I work as a technical artist in video games and there's always at least one (often more) point where you have a glut of ideas and uncertainty, etc. Weather I'm drawing something, setting up a UI, designing a shader, or designing something else in my own time, at some point you need to decide.
Also, I love how you talk about 'what the game wants to be'. That is a REALLY good way to think about it, and it can lead to unexpected discoveries and 'aha' moments that seem obvious after the fact. I've heard the term 'find the fun' before as well, and I think that's similar.
TLDR: Everything you're describing is super familiar to me, a veteran game developer. Even AS a veteran though, I find it useful and interesting to hear you articulate and share your problems and your steps to finding a solution.
(Bonus tip for anyone wanting to get into game dev professionally - Portfolios and projects to show in an interview are important not because we want to see something revolutionary, but because we want to talk to you about your problem solving process, learn how you think and how your creativity works)
these and On The Level have to be the best GMTK stuff yet!
I really love this series you started. It's so easy to watch youtubers ramble about their opinions on "game design" etc. when they are just giving their opinions as game players as to what they like and don't like in games. This series really puts a lot more weight to what you are saying because the audience can see the design process actually happening.
Am I the only one so fuuucking HYYYPEDDDD about this series??! Literally every two days or so I go and check Mark's channel to see if he's uploaded anything... Keep it up! Love your work!!!
I just uploaded the first devlog for my RPG Rhythm Game, and i can say you were the one that gave me the knowledge to get through many desing issues through my development.
Its really cool to see you now get into that process of decision making while lifting the weight of actually making a game.
Keep up the good content!!
I love when games start with a slightly slower pace and pick it up as you go.
Never leaving the the puzzle part is the right call. But I really like the idea of increasing the difficulty in platforming for a climactic second half like portal or many of my other favorite games.
This series is far more entertaining than one would think. I greatly enjoy it.
I'm having the same problem with being really indecisive but in my case it extends to multiple games and projects as whole! I just can't choose which game idea to commit. But watching this video inspired me, so I think I'm going to commit to the game idea I have right now, nothing else, and make a prototype in a month. Thank you so much, Mark ❤
Hi Mark,
Your adventure into game design has inspired me along a parallel path: I'm going to execute my ideas for a board game.
Watching your videos in this series so far has brought up the similarities of designing video games and designing board games for me - I don't know the first thing about coding and although I might well follow down that path eventually, I'm far better right now with a set of felt-tip pens and some card stock. The prototype stage, trying out things with testers - in this case, playing the game to see if the core rules are engaging enough, challenging enough, etc - before trying to make the game in my head and stopping me from heading down the path to developing and designing the actual game are now filling me with an excitement that I haven't had for a while. Probably pandemic-related.
Looking forward to the next video in this series, and indeed all your other videos.
Keep up the lovely work.
I started my indie "career" few weeks ago and I wanted to thank you for these videos, you are really inspiring and videos are helpful 🙏🙏
This is such a fascinating series of videos, I can't wait for more.
You could make a puzzle game like Zelda where the puzzles are in self-contained dungeons or shrines, and you navigate between them on a platforming overworld. Or the best platforming levels could be an end-of-game setpiece, an escape sequence that tests the skills you’ve learned in the puzzles.
But of course that’s if you choose to expand the project later, both ideas are a bit much for a “30 days” goal.
This is so relatable. I went down this same journey not that long ago. I watch GMTK videos to learn new things, but this ‘Developing’ series has been therapeutic. Watching you go through exactly the stuff that I did, all the frustrations, confusions and Eureka moments was empowering. Cheers Mark, thanks for sharing this journey in the most personal way possible.
I felt like puzzle platformer is what you were leaning towards in the last ep
Wow you encapsulated so much of my journey of the past decade. Working on new ideas, prototyping, endless analysis paralysis.
I think for me shifting my expectations and comparisons to other successful indie devs has done a lot for my psyche.
I try to enjoy the process of design and iteration rather than putting enormous pressure on the results produced.
(although sometimes I still beat myself up for not finishing anything in 10 years of development)
Your sense of game design seems very keen, I'll be excited to see whatever else you have in store for us!
Thank you for for sharing your experiences!
An open world RPG at least 5 times the size of Skyrim and with LOTS more content!!
I believe in you!! =D
What is LOTS
MMORPG, too!
@@dzerofive its not an acronym. Its just "lots" as in a lot of
@@bob5432 ah, sleepy me, i read this as "the size of Skyrim and LOTS"
It is so awesome to see a channel try something a bit different and then do it so well. So many channels stagnate and do the exact same formula until its stale and done to death. Trying something new with this game dev series is brave because it's so risky but I am loving this content!
Paused @ 2:02, Mark I remember playing the very old shareware title Jill of the Jungle. In that game, Jill has weapons (pair of daggers?) that she can throw and will return toward her. However, if terrain gets in the way, they will individually get blocked and fall to the local floor. When she gets close to one that has fallen it will be once again attracted to her.
Always good to set a deadline.
I’ve learned that when I did SFX for TV, suddenly I had a 6 day deadline to create a mechanical/electrical and or software solution often nice dressed as prop. And you really focus on the things that need to work and be done. And it’s amazing how much you can do. Especially when you get more experienced.
Question: what if instead of giving the player different abilities, you give the player different types of magnets? Maybe some you can link together for combined effects?
Genius! Different ones could have different properties, and you could make cool puzzles with the different magnets
I really believe that this approach would benefit this game. It would give you control over what abilities are available in any given level or section of a level, it would open the door to more easily add in new powers in future expansion, and I suspect that it would make the code more modular since you can program the character, and then just leave him alone.
Yes! You could also have a type of magnet that pulls/repels objects instead of the normal one with is pulled toward them
ultimately he took a great lesson away from this but I was really surprised he didn't think those two levels were compatible, or mention Celeste. probably the greatest precision platformer out there is full of sliding block puzzles, and solves for people wanting to play it more like a puzzle game with assist mode
I think the real issue at hand is that this is his first real game. I think what you are suggesting could very well work. I think for him though and his situation it would be much better to just decide on if it's a platformer or a puzzle game. Him going through the process is more important than the end product itself by a hundred fold sense no matter what he does it probably won't be very good (at least when compared to other games).
@@chasefox3100 All platformers have puzzles. It would be a damn poor game if it was a platformer with no puzzles. A platformer without puzzles is basically just that Google Chrome dinosaur game that pops up when you have no internet connection. It's basically flappy bird, and he already did that. In a good platformer, your first playthrough is going through and solving all the puzzles, and then when you want to speedrun, it's figuring out - after you've already figured out how to solve all the puzzles - now how do you get through them as quickly as possible, or find ways to bypass the puzzles altogether to increase your speed.
Coming to the conclusion that you can't put a puzzle in your platforming game is just completely misunderstanding the genre, and frankly getting too caught up in what genre your game is to begin with.
Good games don't cater to a genre, and aren't constrained by a genre. Good games have their genre defined after they're made.
@@imnotmike again it's a terminology thing. Woth your definition all games could be described as having or being puzzle games. Genres are tools we use to categorize games. Portal has a shooting mechanic yet isn't a first person shooter while call of duty is. It's all about focus and what the point of the game is.
It should at least be about or have puzzles, since you've more than proved your excellent understanding of their fundamental inner workings
Your effort and enthusiasm in making a video and a video game is admirable. Thank you always!!
This series is so cool, I am really grateful that you are making it. I just have one thought about game mechanics since you are going towards the puzzle genre. I wonder if it would be an interesting mechanic to make changing polarity reliant on holding the magnet, and introduce polarity changing from a distance later in the game.
Honest to god, as a dad of a wonderful, shy and introvert 4 year old boy, I realised that I too have to see my son for who he is. I don't need and I shouldn't push him to be more outgoing or maybe even "brave". He is very lovely, thoughtful and becomes outgoing when he feels save. He is who he is and I love every minute I have with him.
Thanks for a little clarity! And great series on gamedesign! I'm a developer myself, but I develop a projectmanaging App for big corps in hte buidling sector. But going into gamedevelopment is definitely a childhood dream of mine. You push me even further to start spending some time to just look into it.
Great work, please keep on making your videos!
I think a large part of why it kept moving towards puzzle is that the controls were inherently focused on positioning your character, not moving your character. Separating the magnet and the character forces you to think in more complex ways about where the two are and where they’re going to move, rather than just one object, and where it’s movement flows. A platformer focuses on movement, a puzzle game forces thinking about position.
I do really like the puzzle direction though! I’m just really interested now if the controls were changed so that the magnet was always attached to the character, just letting the player focus on how it swings them around. Although, that might just make it feel less like a magnet, and more like Speedrunners’ grapple hook. I dunno, that’s my random thoughts
It's amazing how well you're able to put into words your though processes. That's really something you excel at.
I'm going to be honest, the idea of the character itself being magnetic seemed more interesting. I imagined it being like ikaruga but a platformer where your polarity needed to be changed frequently and creatively. Hope whatever you end up with is something you're happy with.
Nah the picking up and dropping of magnets changes the game so much. There’s only so much you can do by turning your character on and off unless they had more unique abilities. With that in mind I do like the Thor Hammer approach… just make certain walls and obstacles that it can’t be retrieved through and needs to be either manually picked up or moved around the barrier.
@@jhank0cean Agree with you. What the OP describes sounds a lot like Chameleon Run.
The other guy in reply have a point and I wanna add up that.
If GMT did the original idea, he would re-invent Teslagrad and I think that would be a rather sad news for beginning dev.
THIS has hit the EXACT problem I always have when trying to make a game. I am not deciding and rather dreaming up a path that will never be taken. Thank you very much. I REALLY needed this video for my game dev journey.
The more I watch you the more it confirms my theory that film making and game making are VERY similar. Both cover so many technical and artistic areas that the possibilities are endless, and that lack of limitations actually makes it harder when you're trying to make the whole thing without a time limit. The only two times I did something from beginning to end was when I had a deadlines (filmfest and competition). As I'm writing this the video reached minute 19 where Mark says exactly that :)
You are the best man! You just put all the frustrations of game design in a single video. Keep it up!