A Game Design Vocabulary
In the excerpts of A Game Design Vocabulary by Ana Anthropy and Naomi Clark, I was extremely interested in the use of verb and sentence structure analogy to explain the necessary components for video game design. Rules are created for a game to function, and verbs are created so the character can interact with the game and create their own story. This language persisted throughout the reading, and at times lost itself among new ideas it was introducing. In a way, the verbs of video game design were themselves obfuscated and underused.
The format of this reading very much looks like some kind of textbook, though I am not completely sure if it is. Either way, that was the way the information looked and how I interpreted the information given. That said, I found the reading almost ineffective in how it talks about video game design, too abstract in the wrong way. I wouldn’t say that it was bad, or that using sentence structure as a way to talk about video games is in itself a doomed practice, just that it wasn’t very accessible to people who may not know the ins and outs of the English language, or do not have a very stable background in grammar or writing. This is very clearly written for other storytellers, or people who also have a background in creative writing, which, again isn’t necessarily a bad thing. However, the book is about game design, and while both the authors consider game design to go hand in hand with storytelling, as well as tutorial and sound and nearly every other aspect, there’s not much room for people with a more artistic background or, really, any background that’s not in the English field. It may just be me, but I also found the idea hard to grapple with, mostly because neither author sufficiently explains what it is they’re talking about in concrete terms. They instead use more abstract language to understand an abstract concept.
Enough about my criticism, though. I did enjoy the reading, and I got a lot out of it. I never really thought of game design as a part of tutorial, or how a text based or holding-your-hand type tutorial is ineffectual game design. I agreed with the assertion that game designers often don’t trust their intended audience, and thus their tutorials beat you over the head with rules and force you through tutorials to even know what to do. Their way around it was also interesting. In designing a level you have to put tutorial in mind, make it so that, if the player cares and is paying attention they can learn the rules of the game without being told them outright. To create an effectual game you must create an effectual conversation at every level. Of course, dialogue is important if your game has that sort of thing, but also the conversation of the game designer with other game designers, the conversation with the game and the player. A game itself is a conversation, as well as a means of storytelling. The player can play through a story set out for them, experience this predestined storyline with very little choice, or they can explore a game and create that story for themself.
Games are powerful mediums of storytelling, it’s just a matter of being able to construct and guide a player through that story, at times knowing when to let them make their own.
