Achieving The Right Balance: Iterative Development Vs Upfront Design In Games

Finding the Sweet Spot

Game development teams must make important decisions regarding the balance between iterative, rapid prototyping and upfront, technical design. There are benefits and drawbacks to both approaches that must be weighed given the specific goals, scope, and constraints of each project. This article explores strategies for finding the optimal balance between agile iteration and intentional planning.

Discussing the Tradeoffs between Iterative and Upfront Design

An iterative approach with continuous deployment of new features allows for rapid validation of ideas and concepts through real-time player feedback. However, too much iteration without technical planning can lead to accumulation of technical debt, architectural fragmentation, and lack of long-term coherence. On the other hand, comprehensive upfront design can establish critical technical foundations but with the risk of over-engineering features that end up unused or unwanted.

When to Emphasize Iteration versus Planning

The question of where to draw this balance depends greatly on the specific game, the scope of the project, and the composition of the team. For large, multi-year AAA titles with extensive technical complexity, more design documents, systemic planning, and technical specifications are warranted. For indie studios working on shorter projects with small teams, favoring prototyping cycles and reacting to feedback is likely more effective.

Focusing on Rapid Prototyping

When taking an iterative approach, implementing rapid prototypes can validate or invalidate assumptions without excessive wasted effort. Quick iteration cycles with basic systems allow game mechanics and features to be tested before large investments are made.

The Benefits of Quick Iteration Cycles

Fast prototyping cycles provide several advantages:

New concepts can be tried out without extensive coding time
Issues can be identified in early stages rather than late in development
Player feedback on each iteration influences the next
The workload is distributed more evenly over the project timeline

Overall, quick iterations prevent too much commitment to features that later prove problematic.

Tips for Building Basic Systems Rapidly

Some tips for implementing bare-bones prototypes:

Focus MVPs on critical mechanics rather than visuals
Re-use existing assets before making new ones
Use placeholder visuals and sounds while iterating
Script rigidly first, optimize later
Build modular components that can be swapped easily

The goal is not perfect systems, but functional ones that convey the concept.

Example Prototype Code in Unity

Here is example C# code for a simpleUnity prototype of a top-down 2D player controller:

using UnityEngine;

public class PlayerController : MonoBehaviour {

    public float speed = 5f;
    
    void Update() {
        float xInput = Input.GetAxis("Horizontal");
        float yInput = Input.GetAxis("Vertical");
        
        Vector3 moveDirection = new Vector3(xInput, yInput, 0);
        transform.position += moveDirection * speed * Time.deltaTime;
    }
}

This demonstrates a rapidly built system using Unity’s built-in input and movement mechanisms. Additional mechanics, animations, and abilities can be built on top of this foundation in later iterations.

Planning for Long-Term Coherence

While rapid prototyping is crucial, some upfront planning establishes critical technical direction and unity to avoid architectural dead-ends.

Why Some Initial Design is Still Essential

Beginning projects without guiding technical plans risks:

Increasing technical debt and maintenance costs
Integration difficulties between disparate systems
Incoherent player experience from fragmented features
Redundant work across iterations

Well-defined design documents, specifications, and style guidelines can prevent these pitfalls and provide efficiency gains as the project progresses.

Maintaining Consistency and Technical Feasibility

Upfront design decisions should focus on:

System architecture: Establish foundational framework for major systems like graphics, AI, audio, etc.
Workflow: Plan asset production pipelines, coding standards, testing protocols.
Game mechanics: Define interactions between core game systems and components.
Art/Sound: Provide graphical, sonic style guides for coherence.

These technical specifications scaffold a consistent player experience supported by unified foundations.

Architecting Flexible Systems from the Start

Since some features will evolve over iterations, initial technical plans should emphasize:

Modularity: Components and subsystems that are decoupled and replaceable.
Extensibility: Abstract frameworks that simplify adding future features.
Encapsulation: Self-contained modules with defined interfaces.

These programming patterns accommodate changing requirements while enabling a common structure.

Strategies for Hybrid Approaches

Blendingiteration and planning activitiescan provide the advantages of both. Some potential hybrid strategies include:

Parallel Tracks of Planning and Iteration

Split the team into groups focused on:

High-level technical planning
Rapid prototyping of gameplay systems

With coordination, these streams of activity inform each other at regular intervals.

Starting with Vertical Slices

Construct a simplified cross-section prototype with each major system represented. This provides a miniaturized version of the full vision to critique and enhance. Vertical slice development continues throughout production by expanding the feature breadth.

Maintaining Alignment through Communication

Consistent discussions between programmers, designers, artists, and producers allow adapting designs while retaining project alignment. Integration challenges can be addressed cooperatively as the game evolves via iterations.

Achieving the Right Balance for Your Team

Each team must gauge the appropriate equilibrium between upfront planning and iterative development based on multiple factors.

Assessing Your Team’s Strengths

Survey individual and group skill sets across domains like:

Technical architecture vs rapid implementation
Big picture planning vs detail execution
Theoretical system design vs prototyping

Understand capacity for design, documentation, scoping, coding, tool building, testing, etc.

Considering Project Scope and Constraints

Larger scope and complexity demand greater initial design, while tighter deadlines and budgets call for quicker iteration cycles. Define minimal viable product (MVP) compared to later stretch goals. Consider targeting platforms, monetization, distribution, etc.

Allowing Flexibility over Time

Balance of iteration versus planning rarely remains static. As projects mature and pivot based on feedback, the equilibrium may shift further towards prototyping experimentation or conversely, towards design solidification.

By judiciously blending agile, iterative progression with some measure of upfront technical scoping, teams can maximize productivity and creative output.