Formal Abstract Design Tools

Another article relating to the vocabulary of games design is "Formal Abstract Design Tools" (Church, D. 1999). He defines them as a set of tools and general design concepts and therefore a basis to build your game on rather than elements of a game in themselves.

He very aptly sums up Costikyan's point of language being important to learning with this sentence, which I found to be pretty effective:

"Vocabulary is the key to understanding." - as I've mentioned in earlier blogs, brevity is a thing to be admired, and this sentence explains why the article (and by extension the tools) are useful.

Church believes that a key component of a successful game is that when a player is attempting to reach some goal and fails, he/she understands why they failed. Whether this is attempting to jump a pit and falling short ("I jumped too soon damnit!") or in attempting to open a door and finding it locked ("Ah, there'll probably be a key for it somewhere."), the important thing is for the player to feel like they understand the rules and that they have control over what happens in the game.

As a result of this, Church identifies three components which are part of his (and indeed the collective 'Game Designers Vocabulary') Design Tools:

Intention: Making an implemented plan of one's own creation in response to the current situation in the game world and one's understanding of the game play options.

Perceivable Consequence: A clear reaction from the game world to the action of the player.

Story: The narrative thread, whether designer-driven or player-driven, which binds events together and drives the player forward toward completion of the game.

He ends his article with only these three 'tools', but suggests that FADT is a concept which will forever be added to as our games-related dictionary expands and improves.