Difference

Frank Zappa once proclaimed that “without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible”.


This has basically been a part of my game design ethos ever since I've been writing. The other part comes from Robert M. Pirsig (I can't remember whether it was in "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" or "Lila") where there is a concept that progress requires a combination of static and dynamic forms. This is also a big part of Mage the Ascension, which is heavily influence by those two books. The notion states that periods of stasis allow structure to form, and that structure gives strength to a concept or culture, but too much stasis brings stagnation and an inability to keep moving forward. Periods of dynamism allow mutation and growth, which could be positive or negative, but too much dynamism leaves structure behind and brings an insecure and precarious state. Healthy progress requires both. If a period of change brings beneficial improvements to the structure, then the next periods of stasis can lock it into the structure. However, if the period of change brings detrimental issues, then the period of stasis can revert to a prior "save point". 

Mechanisms: Ratchet and Pawl 

It works a bit like a ratchet mechanism, forward turns are allowed through the system while backward turns are negated. It keeps the cycles moving in the right direction.

This has deviated a bit from the game design idea, but still applies. I try to incorporate new concepts into my games, but often build them into existing patterns. If you make a game design too pedestrian and familiar, it becomes boring and people don't see the point of it compared to products already on the market. If you make a game design too unconventional, you lose the stability of familiarity and people don't know what to do with it. There's a sweet spot of progress, but this varies from player to player. A good designer develops their ideas enough to show innovation to the widest range of players without potentially alienating their audience.

...I don't think I've mastered that balancing act yet. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Guide to Geomorphs (Part 7)

Image
A working computer and scanner...that means it is time to get back to work on the geomorph sequence. A lot of the discussion in this set of tutorials has been focused around square geomorphs. They're the easiest for most people to wrap their heads around.  But my preferred form of geomorph is based around the hexagon, these tend to produce more organic and interesting shapes. This is true for natural environments, but it's no less true for urban environments. The example set of geomorphs above as a simple two-phase system. One edge type is plain, the other edge type has a road piercing the centre. There could be dozens of combinations and permutations for each of the two phases around the hexagonal edges, but a quick look at the variety of buildings and road shapes shows that there could literally be hundreds of possible options when drawing these map fragments. But you certainly don't need to create hundreds of designs for the system to be effective. Usin...
Read more

A Guide to Geomorphs (Part 1)

Image
After numerous requests to get back to map tutorials, it's time to start our new series. This time focusing on the concept of geomorphs, modular map fragments that can be mixed and matched. We'll start with a couple of theoretical tutorials before sinking into a few more practical posts. I'm predicting a dozen or so posts in this sequence, but let's see how long it lasts.
Read more