Critical Game Design

Recently I viewed two videos from very prominent game designers. The first was a talk by Dave Perry, designer of such games as Earthworm Jim and MDK. The second video featured Will Wright, the man responsible for the many Sims and Sims spinoffs. The two men discussed game design, and what game design was composed of, outside the obvious. Perry shared his ideas on graphics and sound in games, and how they've advanced through the decades. He also showed a video by a student that dove into emotion and immersion in games. Wright likened games to toys. He discussed how he has always viewed his game designs as toy designs.

Having read many works by both of these designers, and viewed these videos, I can say with absolute resolution that I agree with every thing they say. Not simply because they are clearly geniuses in their field, but also because what they say can be very easily seen in the reactions of people playing their games.

Perry has stressed before creating games with meaning and emotion. These are the games that have lasting appeal. I firmly believe that when a player can make an emotional investment in the game, it is massively more successful than simply being a game. It triggers different thought patterns and feelings. It can educate and motivate. It is not something to be won or lost, but instead something to be experienced. When we design games, we need to consider this. We need to look at what deep connections our game can form with our players.

Wright considers his games as toys. This may seem in stark contrast to Perry's ideals, but actually isn't. Think about the toys you had growing up. These are things you can pick up and manipulate. You can feel them in your hands. Chances are, you can remember a great deal of detail about these things. Wright claims that his games, The Sims in particular, bring about the same feelings in their players. The players are given the unique ability to create their game. To have personal investment in it. They construct their creations inside the game, and then play with them. They are toys.

What Perry and Wright say go hand in hand. Perry stresses emotion in games, and Wright claims that games are toys. I claim that toys invoke emotion. That's what we need in games.

The most impacting games in the future will be the ones we have stake in. We will be connected, either because of an emotional involvement in the story, or because we had a hand in its creation.