- This topic has 19 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 17 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Dear Mr. Williams,
I’d like to thank you for allowing us, the fans, a chance to talk to you, the founder, and previous owner of Sierra (actually I was going to say co-owner/co-founder because of Mrs. Williams involvement, but I don’t know what the extent of that was, since you seem to be the figurehead, but thanks to her too for letting you run this site 😉
I wasn’t really sure how to title this, but I guess this is as close to what i’m asking about as I can think at the moment. I wanted to ask about A) how you went about judging playtime in those games (or depending on how involved you were you could ask Mrs. Williams how she went about doing it). What I mean by playtime is how long a person plays. If I knew where everything was in Space Quest 3 – I can finish it in a couple of hours (or less depending on what I did)… Also timing some old lucasarts games, they came out to about 6-8 hours when I knew all the puzzles and where all the items were. But I hear of today’s games takeing up to 30-40 hours, etc… What i’d like to know is how you decided something was long enough, did you strictly keep to a time limit, or did you just develop it, and whatever ended up, ended up?
Also B) How was the process (more in the early to mid days of Sierra) of creating a game like? Did everyone end up with a fully fleshed out formal document (design document or whatever), or did you sort of start from an outline and kind of play it by ear? I read somewhere that The Secret of Monkey Island (yes I know this wasn’t sierra <g>) basically developed by the guys just putting in funny things and sort of having fun with it, not sticking to anything formal. In fact I looked at the interview at The Virtual Broomcloset with Mark Crowe where the way he described making space quest is that, they mostly went out for pizza and beer <grin> Basically telling me that they weren’t really into formal processes either (of course this was their first game, so I suppose we all have to start somewhere – and I only mean first, as the first they worked together on their own game for Sierra ). So you’re thoughts on formal processes/design docs, verses outlines and organic/evolutionary design process?
The reason i’m asking, is i’ve been an amateur game developer for years (well technically years, although i’m sad to say i’ve not produced everything of value over that time, 12 years, and all I have to show for it is, 2 crappy little clones, and one crappy little retro-style shooter ala space invaders)… it was SQ3 that got me into programming in the first place, and since i’ve seen a resurgence in intrest in the adventure game, i’ve been wanting to do one. And after a few years I found a decent system to do it (i don’t have to do programming it’s more of a scripting system, not unlike ones used in sierra and lucasarts back in the day). So I started working on a 7-part adventure series… and i’m trying to figure out how to best go about designing and implementing it.
Anyways sorry for such a long post, but i’d appreciate any few thoughts you or Mrs. Williams would have on the subject. Thanks for your time (assuming you’ve read this far)
Sincerely,
Keith Weatherby II, a fan since 1989…Link:uhfgood@artoo.net (mailto:uhfgood@artoo.net)
Link: http://uhfgood.artoo.net(http://uhfgood.artoo.net)
-
(re: Game Design Methodologies) I wasn’t really sure how to title this, but I guess this is as close to what i’m asking about as I can think at the moment. I wanted to ask about A) how you went about judging playtime in those games (or depending on how involved you were you could ask Mrs. Williams how she went about doing it). What I mean by playtime is how long a person plays. If I knew where everything was in Space Quest 3 – I can finish it in a couple of hours (or less depending on what I did)… Also timing some old lucasarts games, they came out to about 6-8 hours when I knew all the puzzles and where all the items were. But I hear of today’s games takeing up to 30-40 hours, etc… What i’d like to know is how you decided something was long enough, did you strictly keep to a time limit, or did you just develop it, and whatever ended up, ended up?Â
Also B) How was the process (more in the early to mid days of Sierra) of creating a game like? Did everyone end up with a fully fleshed out formal document (design document or whatever), or did you sort of start from an outline and kind of play it by ear? I read somewhere that The Secret of Monkey Island (yes I know this wasn’t sierra <g>) basically developed by the guys just putting in funny things and sort of having fun with it, not sticking to anything formal. In fact I looked at the interview at The Virtual Broomcloset with Mark Crowe where the way he described making space quest is that, they mostly went out for pizza and beer <grin> Basically telling me that they weren’t really into formal processes either (of course this was their first game, so I suppose we all have to start somewhere – and I only mean first, as the first they worked together on their own game for Sierra ). So you’re thoughts on formal processes/design docs, verses outlines and organic/evolutionary design process?
Every Sierra designer had a different style, but, generally, they all produced HUGE design documents. Roberta’s designs were usually 500 to 1,000 pages.
Typically, there were distinct steps to the design of the adventure games.
1) A two page story idea
2) A map showing the locations
3) A longer design document – perhaps 30-40 pages
4) Artists would get involved at this point
5) Character sheets – to show each character
6) Pencil sketches of each location
7) A much longer design document – perhaps 500 or more pages
For the 3d games we did later, it was even more complex.
As to playtime, I had a rule of thumb that people would feel good about paying $5 per hour for fun. If they pay $50 they are going to be upset if they don’t get at least 10 hours of fun. Ultimately, people would rather pay $1 per hour for their fun, that $5 per hour – so, additional playtime is certainly better.
My people used to confuse this sometimes, and give 25 hours of playtime. The key isn’t playtime – it’s fun. Spending 10 hours trying to solve one puzzle may or may not count as 10 hours of fun. 1 hour of non-fun can completely kill the whole game. I’ve seen games where the designer said “the first 5 hours aren’t fun – because you are building up your character – but, then it gets really exciting” .. I don’t buy into that theory. Anything that isn’t fun isn’t constructive. Focus on fun – and, don’t worry about the clock (generally speaking). The $5 per hour was a guideline not a hard and fast rule. For instance, let’s compare to a trip to Disneyland. It can cost $100 or more (all included) for a day at Disneyland – that might be consumed in  under an hour of actually going on rides. Theoretically, it could be argued that your cost per hour for fun is not only $100 – but, all the grief to get there (parking, traffic, etc). No one complains. Why? Because the fun is good when it happens. The better the fun, the higher the cost per hour people will pay. Boredom isn’t worth paying for. Fun is. The higher the fun, the more they’ll pay. It’s simple.
-Ken W
 -
(re: re: Game Design Methodologies) Shoot 1000 page design documents, that’s pretty darn huge. I keep finding when I try to write out some sort of design document I ultimately end up getting bored with it. Not that I wouldn’t write anything, in most cases I end up with alot of stuff written down (when the game is finished), but it’s usually not in a formalized way. In any case my plan is to have a story outline, and the locations mapped out, and then to start working on puzzles and characters.
As far as “fun”, it’s hardly easy to quantify. I do agree however if you spend “X” amount of hours solving a puzzle that’s not really fun then the whole experience can be ruined. But then I guess you don’t really know what fun is until you have it in a playable form and can test it out.
Thanks for your comments
Keith -
(re: re: re: Game Design Methodologies) Shoot 1000 page design documents,…
Keith:
I couldn’t have said it better. I did “project reviews” every 90 days to see how products were going during development. When someone handed me a thick document, but couldn’t talk about their project – I got frightened. Developers sometimes hide behind thick piles of paper. They have 1,000 pages of design document – but are unwilling to commit on what the cost will be to build the game.
I used to take comfort that people had done the thick documents – but then not allow them into the project review meetings. Leaders should KNOW their products, and be able to talk about them without their notes. If I asked a question, and someone had to look for 10 minutes though their notes to find the answer, we were almost always in trouble.
One of my “Ken Sayings” was always “I hate bureaucracy”.
-Ken W -
(re: re: re: re: Game Design Methodologies) One thing I haven’t considered was the costs. With just me, the only costs are my time since most of my development tools are either free or too old to be compiled as a list of financial costs. If I do any cartoon animation, I suppose i’ll most likely need to keep track of how much I spent on paper, etc… Although the development tools themselves (scanner, computer, etc) are old… Probably materials cost would need to be considered. I guess if you’re working in a team and have a working company you need at least some budget outlines, projected costs, manhours etc… I’ve just never really thought about it when making my own games because it’s still just myself.
Keith -
-
(Game Design Methodologies – Various stuff from Roberta) Here are some old pages I “borrowed” from Roberta’s design documents.
I have lots more of this – let me know if people want it posted…
-Ken WMap #1
Map #2
Phantasmasgoria Interface Design 1
Design Document Page 1
Design Document Page 2
Phantasmagoria Interface Design 2
Phantasmagoria Interface Design 4
Phantasmagoria Interface Design 5
Phantasmagoria Interface Design 6
Phantasmagoria Interface Design 3
Murder Mystery Map
KQ8 Design Ideas
Pencil Sketch from KQ7 -
(Stuff from Roberta and Interaction Scan Project Update) Ken:
Those scans of the design Documents and Maps are awesome! Something that we might want to consider putting on the Archive collection (in part or in whole). I promise I am still at work on the Sierra Newsletter, been busy wrapping up some design concepts at my day job – was able to work with Robert @ Kinkos and get that first one up – I have talked him into doing one of the more recent newsletters since it has 64 pages instead of 32, and more color graphics and such. He is doing a more acurate time study, and we should be able to present you with a breakdown of the process a cost at each step.
For those of you that were concerned with the resolution and striaghtness of the pages. Rest assured that we are keeping 300dpi scans of each page, and that the crookedness displayed in the PDF seems to be happening in the conversion process to the PDF becuase the TIFF files look perfectly straight. When we output the PDF’s we will take a vote from everyone on the final resolution/quality. Right now that compress will yield a 5.5Meg file on the 32 page mags, and probably around a 15Meg on the 64 page newer mags. Maybe even more with all the color graphics/ads. So that is somewhere around 30 per CD. Looks like it will be a 2 CD set for those.
I think we are in agreeance that the OCR process adds tremendous value to the project, being able to search articles and such. Do you have a complete game design document Ken? A complete one from a single game would be something that I believe could be looked at for generations to come, and learned from – would be very valuable for the CD/DVD collection.
Any more luck on hunting down those videos at all? I know you have been staying busy. Just let me know.
-Brad -
(re: Stuff from Roberta and Interaction Scan Project Update) Brad:
I have the videos … LOTS of videos .. some very boring .. some really interesting.
I went to my storage locker to check on the old magazines — it is a HUGE locker, and I thought that it was half empty. No such luck. It is piled to the ceiling with boxes, desks, furniture, etc. I have several reasons to hunt through stuff, but am lacking the energy to tackle a project that large. Maybe next week…
I’ll ask Roberta what she has as far as a “full game design” – my guess is that she does have one. I can’t imagine her throwing a design away – and, I remember seeing a thick book for KQ8 just recently.
-Ken W -
(re: Game Design Methodologies – Various stuff from Roberta) this is awesome! the design documents were really cool. Roberta’s research on interfaces was very interesting. Sierra must have surely heeded her word, in the case of better inventory screens, as I recall mostly all Sierra games released at that time implementing her suggestions.
-
-
(re: Game Design Methodologies – Various stuff from Roberta) Here are some old pages I “borrowed” from Roberta’s design documents.
I have lots more of this – let me know if people want it posted…
-Ken W
Seriously Ken! That’s like asking the Pope if he wants to go to Heaven! If you find the time to “borrow” and scan anything else from Roberta for all of us to see, you have our eternal gratitude! This is wonderful! Personally, I’d be especially interested in King’s Quest-related material. -
-
(re: Game Design Methodologies – Various stuff from Roberta)
this stuff is very cool!
i’m curious about the design document for the unproduced game. do you know anything more about this? i.e. – when it was proposed, what type of interface it would have used (animated? FMV?), why it was never produced?
i’d love to see more materials like this. i find it extremely interesting (especially to see how roberta was involved in the early stages as the game’s author and creator…)
-emily
-
(re: re: Game Design Methodologies) Thanks for posting those documents. It’s great to see some of the thoughts that went into making a few of the Sierra adventures.
If I say anything more than that, I may begin to gush profusely. As I’m sure everybody involved has heard the “I worshipped the Sierra designers! They were an inspiration to me!” bit, I’ll just skip that part. Let me see what I can pull out of the documents themselves.
In looking over the analysis of interface, I’m struck by one thing in particular. For most of the document, Roberta Williams does not focus on how a revamped Sierra interface will function. Instead, she considers what has already been tried, and looks over the way a player might be expected to perceive some feature of the interface. She doesn’t just contemplate the obvious question of how precisely the player should dictate the protagonist’s actions; she also examines the subtleties. How do we focus on different parts of the screen? How does seeing or not seeing the inventory affect the player’s thoughts? It is only after making some conclusions on these matters that she decides how she can improve upon her earlier work.
It’s like a how-to guide for developing player empathy, that elusive defining quality of the greatest adventure game designers.
I think that looking over more of these documents would be quite enlightening, especially for prospective game designers like Mr. Weatherby.
P. S.: I worshipped the Sierra designers! They were an inspiration to me! -
(re: Game Design Methodologies – Various stuff from Roberta) Here are some old pages I “borrowed” from Roberta’s design documents.
I have lots more of this – let me know if people want it posted…
-Ken W
Seriously Ken! That’s like asking the Pope if he wants to go to Heaven! If you find the time to “borrow” and scan anything else from Roberta for all of us to see, you have our eternal gratitude! This is wonderful! Personally, I’d be especially interested in King’s Quest-related material. -
(re: Game Design Methodologies – Various stuff from Roberta) By the way Ken, Phantas Interface Design 6 appears small, not the same size as others, hard / impossible to read.
The singular responses to this are definitely characteristic of the response I anticipated: “That’s like asking the Pope if he wants to go to Heaven!” and “This is what true Sierra Fans crave!”
I don’t wish to approach this rashly, as I may have done in my first disorganized post. So I am drafting a proposal which I will post on a webpage and give the link in a new topic when I’m done. -
(re: Game Design Methodologies)
I totally agree with that theory. People won’t pay to get bored. One game that could be fun but got me disconnected after a while was Myst. Everywhere you turned there was a puzzle to solve. It’s challenging at the beginning but get too much after a while. Of course this is my opinion. An exemple of a good balance of puzzle and fun is probably Diablo 1 and 2. This game got me hooked up because of the music, the atmosphere, the puzzles, the general theme of the game. Easy as it can seems, I believe you got something that some games companies somehow lost in their way to the “publish-for-money” modern game business.
-
-
Great letter and sketches. The sketches remind me of Dungeons & Dragons, where the Dungeon Master had to draw out the rooms and create the NPCs(Non-Player Characters). I would love to see more docs like these too!
And for those who wonder about another Sierra, unless VU can not afford to hold onto the company, I don’t see it comming back in name. I suggest collecting as many screen shots, sound files and scripts as you can. Collect anything that may translate to a remake on a future system. One may have to store CDs and hard copy pictures.
I would like to see a new developement group who has the ability to capture the fun and adventure of the Sierra games in their own games.
I am currently playing Battlefield 1942. The game is fun but it lacks in story and adventure. I have to create my own missions or goals even if the game says I lost because I didn’t go after the flags.
Good luck to TSL, I hope VU hasn’t taken the fun out of creating the next KQ.
-
