| Deadline | Assignment |
|---|---|
| Thursday, Jan 8 | GDC1 and the Door Problem |
| Tuesday, Jan 13 | GDC2 and Iterative Design |
| Thursday, Jan 15 | GDC3 and Critical Analysis |
| Tuesday, Jan 20 | GDC4 and Ideation |
| Thursday, Jan 22 | GDC5 and Game Loops |
| Tuesday, Jan 27 | GDC7 and Interesting Decisions |
| Thursday, Jan 29 | GDC8 and Player Motivations |
| Tuesday, Feb 3 | GDC9 and Stories |
| Thursday, Feb 5 | GDC10 and Interactive Fiction |
| Tuesday, Feb 10 | Taxonomies and Twine |
| Thursday, Feb 12 | Core Loops |
| Tuesday, Feb 17 | Games and Learning |
| Thursday, Feb 19 | Pitch Preparation: Inspiring and Framing |
| Tuesday, Feb 24 | Pitch Preparation: Brainstorming |
| Thursday, Feb 26 | Final Project Pitch |
Read Liz England’s “The Door Problem”. Write a paragraph about what surprised you and where you see your interests represented, submit it on Canvas, and prepare to discuss this in our meeting.
Optionally, for additional discussion of what it means to be a designer, watch Richard Carrillo’s GDC talk on how to interview game designers.
Complete the “Trying it Out” exercise. Document your results by summarizing your original game, the changes you made, and their impact. Include photographs as appropriate to communicate your designs.
Write a critical analysis of a game you have played following the format from the reading. When describing the formal elements, use the taxonomy and nomenclature as presented. That is, you should explicitly address the objectives, rules, resources, state, information, sequencing, interaction, and theme.
As part of your analysis, address the core loop using Chambers’ approach that was introduced in class: What is the player doing? What’s stopping them? Why are they doing it?
Analyzing a small tabletop game is recommended because the design elements are all visible; video games are black boxes by contrast. If you choose to write about a digital game, use a small one. Resist the urge to tackle any AAA video games or even large indie games. Such “games” are functionally games-of-games, and it is difficult to separate one part from the rest.
As always, think about the needs of the readers when you compose your analysis. Images and figures often serve to clarify your analysis. Remember to cite your sources.
Choose three different starting points from the “Generating Ideas” section of the reading and come up with a new game idea for each. Write a two-sentence vision statement for each, being sure to identify the genre and modality (such as video game or card game). Label each proposal using the idea generation nomenclature provided by the reading. Then, for each, identify an aspect of it that you think, but cannot yet know, is fun. Write a paragraph describing how you would make a prototype to address that design element, following the guidelines in the reading.
The preparation for this meeting is relatively brief, so consider using some time to complete first player log if you have not already done so.
Complete the mini-challenge from the reading, ignoring the character limit and Twitter requirement. Be sure to label and justify your identified feedback loops as positive or negative. Then, form and defend a hypothesis of what you think would happen if your proposed rules change were followed. Summarize your findings on Canvas and prepare to present your findings in class.
Complete the homeplay from the reading. Once you are satisfied with your mod, playtest it. In your submission, describe your change, what you hoped from it, and the result of playtesting it. Describe how this relates to Flow as presented in the reading.
For the programmers: This is a good opportunity to reflect on the differences between digital and paper prototyping. Consider how you would implement War as a digital game. Then consider your rules change and the modifications required in your software. Having reflected on this, you may have a greater understanding of the benefits of low-fidelity prototyping.
Complete the homeplay in the reading and be ready to discuss your solution in class. Caution: most students who have attempted this challenge in the past have gotten it wrong by conflating griefing and competition.
Recommended reading: Bartle’s commentary on the applications and misapplications of his theory.
Complete the homeplay in the reading and be ready to discuss it in class.
Play one or more well-regarded examples of interactive fiction. I recommend chosing one of the winners of the 2025 IFComp or a previous year’s. Friends in my social network also recommended Adam Cadre’s 9:05, Admiral Jota’s Lost Pig, and Matthew S. Burns’ and Tom Bissell’s The Writer Will Do Something. Regardless which you choose, you are expected to invest at least an hour’s attention to playing.
Write a brief reaction to share your thoughts about the play experience.
Read the first excerpt from Keith Burgun’s Clockwork Game Design, which is available on Canvas under Files. Then, for each level of his taxonomy of interactive forms, come up with an example of that form beyond those he provided. Briefly justify your example.
Note that in later work, the author switched to using the term “strategy game” rather than “game” to clarify that he is not trying to be prescriptive about what we call “games.” The point is to focus on the taxonomy and the interactions involved, not necessarily the labels, each of which comes with cultural connotation.
Use Twine to create an original story with at least five nodes. Export the story to an HTML file by navigating to the Build menu and choosing “Publish to File”. Make sure the file name contains your name so that we know who created what. Upload the HTML file to the “Twine” in our shared folder on Drive.
Read the second excerpt from Keith Burgun’s Clockwork Game Design from Canvas’ Files area. Identify two games, beyond those in the reading, that have clear core mechanisms. At least one of these must be a digital game. Submit your analysis, ensuring you have stated the core mechanism and described important secondary systems.
Burgun provides an action-goal format for documenting core loops. A viable alternative is Andrew Chambers’ approach, to answer the three questions:
Read the final project specifications and Game Design Concepts Level 11.The latter’s are not a perfect match for ours, but the process overview is still valuable. As you consider this short reading, reflect on the work we have done to reach this point. Based on what you have learned so far, consider what specific kinds of challenges you expect from the final project and be ready to discuss them in class.
Read at least pages 20–38 of Klopfer, Osterweil, and Salen’s “Moving Learning Games Forward”. Imagine making an educational game to teach something you are passionate about. Identify a concrete learning objective for the game. That is, complete the sentence, “After playing this game, the player will be able to…”
Choose one of the game integrations from the reading (such as authoring systems or content systems) and consider how it can be used for your game idea, explicitly drawing upon the design principles later in the reading. In your submission, describe how the integrations and principles serve the learning objective of your game.
As Gary recommends, it might be a good idea to space out parts of the exercise, particularly at the chapter break, to give your mind time to work on the patterns.
Prepare your final project pitch. The pitch consists of two parts: a written concept document and an in-class presentation. It should be clear that the pitch aligns with the final project design constraints.
The concept document will have the following structure:
The working title is how you will reference the game during the design process.
The introduction describes the game in one or two sentences. Be sure to address the number of players and game genre.
The background section describes the motivation for the game and its relationship to other games. For example, if you are particularly inspired by another game, or if you have particular learning outcomes for your game, describe that here.
The core gameplay describes the main activities of the game. Capture the player’s actions using strong verbs. Use Chambers’ three questions to frame your description: What is the player doing? What’s stopping them? Why are they doing it?
The target audience describes the kind of player for whom this game is being made. This is an appropriate place to cite other successful games that serve your audience.
The oral presentation is an “elevator pitch” and will take place in class in front of your peers. You will have only one minute to make your pitch, and so practicing this pitch rigorously is A Good Idea™.
©2026 Paul Gestwicki. This work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.