Game Creation is like Sausage Making (repost)

they don't have to design the engine.... they are using Unity which seems to me gives them more flexibility.

 

That's where planning and design comes in. Knowing HOW they will work, before they are presented to "clients".

 

I know what you are saying but it doesn't seem realistic in this scenario. Some times life doesn't work that way.

If they were developers for the Cinnamon Desktop environment for Linux that would be a different story. They need to have a really structured list of goals and have a clear plan before even thinking starting work.

Also if you wanted to upgrade an existing computer network, you have to plan every detail before you order the equipment.

... this isn't the reality SotA development is in. Their design has to be much more fluid because some ideas need to be tested before even knowing it fits. They have to dig in before they fully have a final plan. There is no other way.

 

I could not disagree with you any more than I do at the moment.

 

This is an experienced design team. If the system is architected not to bleed, infinite amounts of content can be created before, during, and after building the core mechanics and engines. But if you start wanting many things from one place to have some weird interaction somewhere else, then the nice walls come down and they have a big mess.

 

Isn't it great when right and wrong seem to contrast so well? In this situation I believe there is a little bit of a mix and a bleeding between the lines of what is right and wrong. They have the plan, but they need the flexibility. Sorry creativity isn't black and white.

 

That is how games are traditionally made, behind closed doors, They say, This is how this will work, then they build it, then they decide yay or nay. We get to see the proposal, we get to see the testing, we get to see the bugs, we get everything in between, and we get to say yay or nay to that feature. Now I know many of you have been in betas and alphas for games, I have as well. We aren't even close to the point where they would normally let people see anything more than screenshots, let alone major features and features lists before the game is made. All the other games you see, there is a reason they don't list out all of their features 3 months into development.

 

Yes and no. I think people get caught up in the "style" of a thing as not being the same scope of something else.

IOW, if you really think it takes less to architect an online world, persistent, for kids to play with spongebob, Dora, etc... it sounds as if you are seeing more a stylistic choice versus all the work behind for the platform.

Someone who makes Toyota engines is still the same as someone who makes Ferrari engines. It is solving different problems, but both are ground in a reality of structural engineering, mechanical engineering, etc...

As @Killwich said, it is not different. And any worthy designer will tell you iterate, iterate, iterate. You are NEVER going to get it right the first time (0.00000001%) someone will always find problem areas you didnt account for, and your design at the end will not match your start.

We have that right here. We started with a list of features and in the last 10 months it has changed, some slow, some quick, closer to what the final design will look like, especially as systems are brought online.

I think you have a false equivalency argument there.

They are writing software for a specific purpose -- to represent the on paper design of a world in a 3D computer space.

No matter how you slice it, design is design. The medium (sometimes) matters, but in the end, you are designing some product for consumption in some medium.

How many bells and whistles can certainly be argued, but I would point out a principle in good design is KISS and non-instructional, intuitive usage (built in)

 

I appreciate the amazing insight. However, with proper planning, flexibility and the gray areas can be accounted for ahead of time.

 

I think the point is lost if we're picking apart this analogy, but I'll bite. The message I get from it is simply this: game creation is a messy process. While we're not privy to every little detail that goes into making SotA, we are seeing the product and its byproducts at various stages and how it looks in whatever shape it's currently in along that process whenever they let us see it. And the recipe for that sausage could be changing on a daily basis as they try new things or even throw away the ingredients or half-made sausage and start over fresh again.

The typical consumer only sees the end product and only then does he "consume" it to form an opinion. Backers are forming opinions all along that process, trying different recipes, consuming it before it's final and ready, and the point of the OP is to give us perspective before we go postal, grab the pitchforks and knives, and run around like headless chickens yelling that the sky is falling. Unfortunately, that point is still lost completely on some people.

So sausage making is one very applicable analogy. If you only want to enjoy the end product, don't peek behind closed doors to see how it's made in all its gory, messy, bloody bits and definitely don't consume something before it's cooked and ready if you don't understand what you're eating. If you understand the process and have the stomach for it, become a backer and get engaged constructively. If you don't, come back when it's ready for you to eat.

 

That's very well said. I believe this to be true.