Nailing your game's vision during the initial concept phase | GI Sprint
A recurring challenge in game development is ensuring a clear understanding of what the project aims to accomplish.
Graham McAllister, an organizational psychologist and the founder of Team Sync, has dedicated recent years to addressing this very issue. His inspiration stemmed from Jason Schreier's exposé on Anthem's problematic development for Kotaku.
However, Anthem is not an isolated case. For example, the development of Hyenas by Creative Assembly, a project that eventually got canceled, reportedly had a budget of approximately $100 million. Developers involved in Hyenas have anonymously revealed that the project's direction was unclear throughout its seven-year development span. You can read more about this here.
In a discussion with Christopher Dring of GamesIndustry.biz for GI Sprint, McAllister elaborates on why it is particularly challenging to maintain a unified vision and offers strategies to mitigate this issue.
Watch the full discussion below, download it, or access it on your preferred podcast platform.
Challenges in Communicating Ideas
McAllister notes that during the initial phases of game development, articulating the vision of the project can be particularly difficult. Often, the core idea is shared incompletely among team members, leading to varied interpretations that stray from the original vision as the information is passed along.
Every team member might hold a slightly different understanding of the game vision, shaped by their personal experiences.
"It's quite improbable that everyone will interpret the vision identically," McAllister comments.
This issue is further complicated by the nature of the language used. Conceptual terms are often abstract and ambiguous, while detailed language might describe game features without conveying the experience on an emotional level.
Specifically within the gaming industry, describing the intended feeling of a game can be especially challenging, McAllister adds.
Importance of Alignment at Project Start
McAllister emphasizes the need for teams to converge on the vision early in the production phase. His conclusions, supported by management science studies, indicate that clarity during the concept stage is crucial to avoid costly and time-consuming revisions later.
"Decisions made during the concept phase affect 70% of a project's expenses," he states.
These costs do not solely arise during the concept stage but influence various factors, including team size and game scope, which are determined early on. Missteps in this phase often lead to expensive and time-consuming corrections later.
There's a common yet flawed belief among developers that an unclear vision can be refined during development. However, this approach usually results in significant rework, as McAllister warns.
"Many think they can speed through the process, but they end up moving in divergent directions, worsening the situation," he notes.
Such practices underline the critical mistake of preferring swift but misaligned progress over foundational clarity.
The Human Cost of Poor Communication
Poor communication in game development isn't only a financial burden; it also takes a toll on team morale. Constant rework and unclear direction can lead to burnout and demotivation among staff.
"This can erode staff motivation and lead to friction and burnout," McAllister points out. "Developers often express frustration when they have to redo work due to mismatched expectations or ignored warnings."
"Project cancellations have resulted. This goes beyond mere technicalities—it's a drain on both time and resources, severely affecting the studio's culture and the lives of its people. Conflicts arise unnecessarily because there is confusion about the project's direction, causing friction among team members as they struggle to correct the issue."
"The time spent, financial costs, creativity of the project, and the psychological wellbeing of the team and studio are all affected. These factors all originate from one primary issue. All available evidence highlights this as the key factor for a successful team due to its extensive impact on nearly all team activities."
Recognize Misalignment in Project Vision
Creating a good game swiftly requires that everyone involved understands the project's vision. To address this, McAllister developed the 'Vision Alignment Check.' This tool ensures everyone has a unified understanding of the project's goals.
McAllister also identified "potential signs that your team might lack alignment."
"The initial sign is feeling that defining the vision is taking longer than anticipated," McAllister pointed out. "Time alone won't solve this. Other indicators include endless discussions with little progress on game features. It's healthy if time spent in concept results in progress, but if you’re trapped in a loop, it becomes detrimental."
The final sign of misalignment during the concept phase is a lack of understanding of the game's vision among all parties, including stakeholders outside the development team.
"In co-development scenarios or with publishers, everyone should have an equal understanding of the vision," McAllister explained. "Game development is a collaborative effort."
"Achieving a unified vision that is uniformly interpreted by every individual is highly unlikely"
The idea of teamwork extends to the entire studio. If there's uncertainty about the project's vision, team members should feel empowered to challenge leadership.
"Though challenging, you must address vision misalignment," McAllister advised.
"This falls upon leadership. There must be a culture where it's not only acceptable but encouraged to admit uncertainty about the project’s direction.”
McAllister added: "Newer team members may hesitate to voice concerns, especially when a renowned designer with extensive experience is involved. Even if it's tough, expressing confusion is crucial. Studio culture plays a big role here. Leadership might say they encourage speaking up, but in practice, that can be very challenging."
Collaborate by Playing the Game Together
To ensure clarity on the vision, playing the game together can be effective. McAllister referred to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild development, where the team frequently played the game together.
This practice ensured everyone understood their roles, enhancing overall efficiency.
"During the development of Breath of the Wild, Nintendo brought in 100 additional team members from another department to meet the Switch launch deadline," McAllister explained.
"Avoid working in isolation. Establishing a shared team understanding is crucial"
"Instead of pushing the new team members to work faster, they played the game collectively every few days to exchange knowledge, a practice they termed 'horizontal information sharing.' Psychological studies support this method. Sharing knowledge is highly beneficial, often referred to as 'team mental models.' The better team members know each other, the more effective they become."
A task mental model focuses on game alignment, whereas a team mental model involves collective performance towards the goal.
"If I know you handle art and foresee an impact on your work, I’ll inform you, enhancing efficiency. Without awareness of team members’ tasks and methods, knowledge circulation suffers. Evidence suggests isolated work is less effective; building a team mental model is vital."
This approach isn't limited to development roles. Everyone involved, including business teams, should engage in playing the game together.
"Various roles – art, programming, production, QA, CEO, marketing – should observe the game together,” McAllister urged. "This way, everyone understands the game's vision."
