Do We Need Game Designers? | Game/Show | PBS Digital Studios

Apple TV & Videogames
↓ More info and sources below ↓

On Today's Vlog, Jamin shares his thoughts on what the if we REALLY need Game Designers. He looks through a wider cultural lens and sees that, across almost all "capital-D" Design disciplines, there are auteurs and there are design groups. Are games any different? Check it out!

Gamasutra article on HalfBrick:

----------------------------------------­--------------------------------------

[Duffator]

A game without a game designer is just like a movie without a director. People on team with different roles and differen ideas arguing about everything with no result. Someone has to have a clear goal and a vision to make everything work together.

[lollibyte]

Well, it really is situational. I work in company that makes webpages. After we got the specs from client and boss about the page, site is pretty much after that made by 3 people: graphic designer, backend developer and frontend developer. Graphic designer designs the appearance of the site and it's graphical elements, backend guy makes sure that we have cms and all the possible heavy-lifting coding done and after that the project goes to frontend developer (in our case, me) who makes things look as pretty as graphic designer wanted and polishes the work of the backend developer, which is mostly just fine tuning it.

Each of us have our own purpose, and we contribute to the team. Graphics person completely focus on aesthetic and visuals, things that please the eye, peek and interest and make the site pleasant to watch. As they don't have to actually do those things, just visualise them, it means they tend to be more open minded of mixing ideas and creating new stuff, but occasionally getting their expectations little too high, and then rest of the team have to drag them back to reality a bit.

Backend person is usually completely emerged to create product databases, calendars, email systems and other stuff which requires lot of thinking, designing inner logic, making things efficent, all those things that happen beyond what people can see to save, remove and otherwise manipulate data in ways that are required. They kinda take care of the engine. They can focus solely on data and system itself, without having to pay attention to anything else that fact that things do what they are supposed to do. This might though some times cause them to write something that prints out in pretty ugly way and occasionally they get that moment when they forget that just because something is readable for them, it doesn't actually mean it's readable for an average person...

Fontend development, at least in our company, isn't particulary a job for a brainiac, because basically I just do what I'm told to do. Most of the decisions, ideas and complicated stuff has pretty much already been made when stuff hits to my desk. What I do, is simply take what everyone else has done and put the stuff together. It doesn't mean that I wouldn't need to be creative, I just rarely have to do things out of thin air, but instead, my mission is to be the dull practical person who actually has to make everything work together in the way that it is functional, nice to look at, and user friendly. And you would be surprised how many times it ends up being ridicilously hard to make all of those 3, simple things to be true, specially if the project is ambitious. And that moment you get those finally done, small voice in your ask: "oh yes, is it crossbrowser friendly?" and on that moment you open your IE9, crawl under the table to cry a bit and get back to work. </sarcasm> Big set back in my job is that if some part of the "engine" isn't working properly I got no backend developer super brain to tackle all the problems, and while my job is more visual, it doesn't make me exactly very good at solving sudden graphics crisis if we need a new, big element and fast.

But you know, many jobs we have just include job from one or two of us. Sometimes we got right kind of engine already, it just have to be tuned, so we just copy it, I tweak it and we don't need the backend guy to that project. Sometimes structure of the site is so robust and full of hardcore stuff that it's easier that backend guy just does the styling themselves from graphics designer's instructions and poke me if they need help on something. Sometimes client already has graphic design on their mind or they have got it outside, etc and our graphics designer is then free to do something else.

I think that in good team people tend to know at least little bit of each other's work and can jump in if needed to help or replace their contribution. But that doesn't make them obsolete. In some cases it might be so that in certain kinds of projects you need less people, but if you kick them out, you'd better then do only projects were you don't need those people after that. Having team challenges everyone becoming better at their thing and frees resources to be more focused. But as said, doing just your thing sometimes blinds you from the work other people are doing.

So, according my own experience in my field I can see there are games and teams who probably don't need seperate game developer, but work can shared by the team. But I think that limits what kind of projects the team can do. And that is something I think is something to be aware of.

[MarkFilipAnthony]

You hire designers because they're expert in their art. Why would u get rid of the experts of a craft that is highly necessary in your product?

Yes you can get rid of most people, but getting rid of your designers is like getting rid of your programmers, or similar. I'm sure there are plenty other people who can program, and work as a team to get things done, but clearly you want the best people possible at their craft to be able to do so.

Getting rid of your designers just shows how little you care about that part of the work. Yes "everybody can do design", but not everybody can do professional design. But hey, maybe these developers doesn't care that much about it in their games.

[FrankieSmileShow]

A smaller team working on a game will very often end up with everyone pitching in ideas, its just natural. People are involved and interested, everyone is creative. In the Barkley 2 team, everyone pitches in ideas, be it for characters or story bits or game design or level design. People wear many hats in indie development, its just natural.
But we still have some core values and ideas about the games' tone and its design philosophies, and we need to keep our ideas in check to make sure they don't go against those, lest the game becomes an unfocused mess. This is where you need a designer.

The best example of dev teams without a "designer" is in game jams. In game jams, there often (though not always) are no formal jobs like designer, producer, etc. Everyone collaborates and makes spontaneous decisions on what they do. You just don't have time to organize a chain of command on design decisions anyway, its a wild free-for-all where everyone does their best and hope it all fits together in the end. Sometimes a "designer" among the team emerges naturally as the idea develops, but the overall idea can always swerve halfway through if problems arise. This happened many times in jams I've participated in: We realize halfway through that our core concept doesnt work, and someone comes up with an idea to "save" the game and have something fun ready by the end. A new "designer" emerges and we keep going!
But anyway, even without any "informal designer", It often works out well since the context of a jam keeps the games scope in check, and the mix of ideas often results in something unique and fun, if a little clunky. That's what you want from a game jam anyway!

However, without a design lead, a larger game made with a larger team over a longer time period can easily lose focus, as everyone involved will have different ideas of where to take the game. Never presume everyone understands exactly what the game is supposed to be about! Even if everyone appears to be on board, there will always be differences in this understanding among them.
There needs to be some guidelines at very least, a common goal that everyone is on board with to avoid straying too much. That's what a designer and a design document can do. A designer' job can be to make sure the team doesn't stray too far from those central goals. It will often become a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth otherwise.

[SecretFoxfire]

Can the entire team collaborate on the design of a game? Sure. But you need one person with an overarching vision or you end up with a chaotic, aimless mess, like Starbound. The fact is that *everyone* believes they are a good game designer, especially people who have worked on games in some capacity already. But most people are *not* good game designers. It's like how every 8-year-old watches their first kung fu film and suddenly believes they're a martial arts expert. Designing a game is not the same skill as coding one, or writing music for one, or making graphics for one. It is something very few people are really good at. For example, if an artist (who is really really good at creating visual art) takes on the design of their next game, you end up with Morphopolis, visually stunning but so poorly designed so as to be almost unplayable. If games were easy to design, then most games would be well-designed, and they're not. If you want to make sure your next game is good, the very last thing you should do is fire your designers.

[meodai]

I don't think that having a Game Designer excludes the idea of a game being a collaborative effort, but it ensures that the game has a clear idea, style, aesthetic... 
In graphical/web design this person would be the art director.


I think its essential to have person with a clear idea that, that does not mean how ever that, this person will not be influenced the team.

The problem with group-decision & group-designing is that you often end up with a compromise-solution, that feels less accomplished and polished as something driven by a clear vision, even if not everyone is happy about it.

[IAmEnormous]

A lot of Nintendo's best and most innovative games came to be almost solely because Miyamoto just went "yeah, nah, do it like this, " and then they proceeded to do so. So yes, I think truly great games would do well to have a central creative force behind it.

[NikoKun]

As you said near the end of the video, it really does depend. It depends on the situation of the team, and the company, and what stage of game development they're on. We really cannot generalize this issue as "game designers aren't needed", because that's like not needing artists for art, or musicians for music..
It also depends greatly from game to game, team to team, or company to company, because these things are much more dynamic and changing. Some games are developed by 1 person, or a small team, others are developed by huge teams of 100s. Each situation is so different, that this is almost a non-issue to discuss.
Of course, the nature of the game-development field itself is also changing with time. The software used to develop games is advancing rapidly, and making things easier and more accessible. Game engines like Unreal Engine 4 are making it possible to develop entire games, without having any programers. All the scripting that might be needed, can be done by the other developers on the team, using the Blueprint system, which is a visual scripting done in easy to understand diagrams. And these kind of software advances not only allow the teams to get smaller, it also allows more independent developers to do all the work of developing a game by themselves..
Maybe it's not so much that game designers aren't needed, but rather that the job itself is just changing shape. Before, each team member's job was so complex in itself, that they could only focus on 1 small part of the development process, in order to be experts at their job.. But now each member of the team can branch out, and handle many different aspects of the job, because the software and process has become easier, if that's the right word.

[PIKMINROCK]

I feel this is parallel to wanting direct democracy in a government. Perfectly fine for a small group but bigger groups need people for the bigger picture.
Also, you clearly have a misconception on how games are made. It isn't like game designer means its one or two people leading the ship. At the top is the producer, who makes sure the game is on track. If the producer is involved with a few projects, they may have an assistant producer. Then there's the director who calls the main shots in the game's direction throughout. There might be an assistant director if its large enough. However, the game's concept is developed by the Planning team first. The main points of the game are decided by these guys before any programming is done. After the planning phase is done, the components of the game have their leaders who work under the director (and assistant director). There's Program Director, Design Director/ Art Director, Character Director if the game has a reasonable amount of character focus, Sound Director, Creative Director for writing in an narrative driven game, perhaps a coordinator if there is significant outsourcing. Then under these directors, you have leads if the project is big enough. Even, at the bottom of creative staff, they still have some input. Character and environment designers still have control over certain details unspecified. Programmers can put in neat tricks in their solutions or perhaps make easter eggs or even turn a glitch into a feature.

[GusSchultz]

I'm not usually interested in watching your "Thoughts" videos, but this was pretty good. I think you are right on with the idea that not every studio needs a dedicated game designer. Because while guys like Sid Meier and Miyamota are essentially gods whose ideas should always be listened too, if you don't have someone like that then utilizing the team you have is a good idea. Programmers who go into video games are generally there because they want to make games. I've never met anyone who just wants to code or graphic design for games, but doesn't have ideas of their own.So yeah, if you think your team has a group of creative minds that you can channel into design, why not?

[emmy]

Of course a game needs a game designer each person has a specific role into making a game granted some may need it less but there important for sure....I want to be a games designer when im older :D

[TheGrifdail]

Hi ! I'm a video game design student. Actualy, my degree is called "Game design and programming." .
I'd like to point to game jam. During game jams, there is often no game designer. First someone pitch an Idea. It can be anyone from a programmer to a sound designer. Then anyone put his touch into the gamedesign. During a one week jam, one of our graphiste took the job of designer during an afternoon : He organized playtest and tweak variable. The next day his pal did the same thing with the level design. During game jam, game designer are often purposless most of the time for this reason. (Not always)
On the other side, some project require dedicated skill and time. For instance, I worked on project with long, carrefully designed data for every single item. Nobody on our team except the designer could have done the job as efficiently.
For big project, like triples A, Game designer are pretty much mandatory !

On small scale, Yeah, everyone can be a designer, but for larger project, a dedicated man (or women) is best !

[sedonaparnham]

To design a game is one thing, to have it come to life is another thing entirely.

Games are always a collaboration, and I think that's why I say 'designer' less and 'developer' more often to describe people who make games, because there are programmers and artists who have a great concept of design, and in many cases, it's the collaborative effort that helps build the game and bring it to fruition. I witness a lot of 'idea' guys, who will have great concepts, but not really be able to do anything with them. However, programmers and artists still need a good feel for design to make something come to life.

So overall, I feel it really depends on what the studio feels they need, and that varies depending on who makes up the team. I do think, however, that a designer needs a firm knowledge of programming and art and all the other little aspects that help make a game in order to bring that game to life. To design is to have knowledge of how it will be put together at all.

[fimbleful]

half brick isn't necessarily a proper representation of elthe entire gaming community. thay design Mobile games. I'm not trying to discredit mobile games but saying that mobile games and Video games like Mario, Braid, Portal, Deus ex are the same is completely wrong. Many mobile games are free and are designed with that in mind. ads in them or microtransactions. Figure head game designers work to deliver gaming experiences for their consumers money while mobile games are designed to be play in order play. Like Clash of clans for example you play the game in order to get better at playing the game waiting for stuff to be built.

[JoshForeman]

You mention Doublefine as an example of a company that is maybe sort of leaning this direction, and it's definitely not. I'm an old friend of Brad Muir who (until very recently) has been a lead designer there. What DF does is work hard to keep OPEN to design ideas from everyone. That's a very important, cool and intentional thing to do, but it's nothing LIKE abolishing the role of designers. It's still absolutely fundamental to have specialized designers wrangle those ideas into workable systems and mechanics. Why Half Brick can get away with this is because of the relative simplicity of their games. And I predict it won't last long.

[neeneko]

designer, architect, tester, programmer, artist, project manager.. the smaller the team (and project) the more you can wear multiple hats. But people specialize, and the more room (and need) you have for bringing specialists into your team, the easier it makes handling larger projects. Granted, good specialists listen and collaborate with other types, but having someone who eats and breaths a specific element of the project really helps when it gets big enough for someone to have to make those decisions.

[Smeagolthevile]

I had a long thing written but I came up with a good analogy. I am a DM for D&D, I am ultimatly the game designer. I do not NEED to be there, the players have the books they could decide what kind of thing they wanted to do, take turns rolling for the monsters they fight, use the tables to randomize loot. But thats not what the game is, that is not focused, its just randomness. From experience if you let players have any kind of freedom they WILL go in 1000 different directions, even if you have them on a semi guided path through a story with a defined beginning middle and an end.
Even fruit ninja needed a game designer, someone to come up with all the little detains and nuances of the game. Yeah, others may put ideas in, but that has no bearing on if those ideas are used or not, or how they are used if they are.
Lastly, and seriously, even if someone is the best video game artist that ever worked in the field, or is the best and fastest programmer you have ever seen, it does not mean they have a clue what they would be doing. Yeah, I can hear the argument that they would just choose someone else from that team to help, but WHY do it at all? I have seen this happen at my job. Here is a position, we dont need it, we can take two others and they can do it along with their other work. Oh, wait they are now both over tasked and jobs arent getting done, time to hire someone to fill that person's job who we fired for our experiment.

[jl_legend]

Does the art dictate the artist or does the artist dictate the art? Both are true, something can be commissioned and that can easily be a group effort - while often inspiration comes from a singular mind (or a small group of singular minds). I don't think products from either source are inherently better than the other by virtue of being from that source, the product speaks, and money talks ultimately.

Speaking of designers though, quintessentially the designers I always think of when thinking of designers, are Sid Meier or David Brabham and Ian Bell who encapsulated much of the games I played as much younger version of me, and will hold a place in my heart, but I do recognise there's a community of people who carry these individuals visions into delectable reality.

[AntiAntagonist]

I think it's dependent on the project. New mechanics and large projects require more planning. Having someone focus on a subject/portion of the project is important if you want it to shine.

However it certainly makes sense for the mobile market to not focus on designer positions as much. Their projects are smaller, so don't require as much time to iterate; new mechanics can be adjusted quickly.

[calyblogs]

The thing about the art-making process and this whole concept of genius was that by the Renaissance, painters started to sign and "own" their work, instead of being attributed to guilds, because they wanted to elevate their work like the high arts of the time-- which were poetry and drama. And so down the line, it's been like this one, individual driving figure that we turn to-- the "author." And we see it all the time even when in reality the process is ALWAYS collaborative-- the director owning the movie, the designer creating the game, the artist in community-based art installations, the architect designing the building-- they always have teams with hundreds of people down the line responsible ultimately for the final product. But to counterpoint, what they'll tell you is that the author is the one who thought up the "idea" and that the other people were just needed to execute it. And that's the grain-- this idea, and the importance of it, and that's why we attribute things, often if not always, to a single driving force, the author.