Crawford Response

The first chapter we were supposed to read goes over the steps a designer can take to design a game. Some are obvious, such as the programming phase and the design phase, but there were also steps I had not thought about. I really hadn't put a lot of thought into researching a game, but I guess all games do need some level of research. Also, everything he had to say about setting the goal of a game was very interesting. It really does help a game have a purpose for being there and helping a gamer feel like they accomplished something after they play it. It also looks like it will help ground the designers as they work on other phases. And just because the programming phase and design phase were expected in the sequence did not mean they did not prove insightful. I had never thought of something like I/O sequences but I can see why they were very important to design around.

The second part of the reading talked about different techniques to keep in mind when designing a game. It felt like a much more dense read. The section about pitting the human against machine was interesting. After all, that is what a lot of games are all about; the only thing you are trying to defeat is the computer. It made me think of solitaire - the title of the section - but also all those chess and checker games that I played against the computer when I was younger. But you don't really want your player thinking that way; that it's being outwitted by it's smartphone.  The different relationships the players could have with each other was also interesting. It made me think of the recent League of Legends games I played, or the last time I played Mario Kart. You need to make sure your players are balanced, but how do you balance humans?