Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

nickbentleygames.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 40 posts

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#21

Post by caseysoftware »

trop wrote: post #7

This has some relation to the "Disney Method" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney_method ) where one delays self-criticism until after one has engineered out the problem, and delays engineering things out until one has dreamed up ideas. Of course the Disney Method is cyclical, and requires returning to the dreaming-up state and on from there. This also reminds me of how 35mm street/photojournalists work (see, for…

> A fiction writer I met teaches her students to make three passes at their work. As I recall, she described the first being for ideas, the second for intentions, the third is to make it read as inevitable.

That's really intriguing. Do you have any more info or background on this?

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#22

Post by stonemetal »

sleepychu wrote: post #2

Interesting read and approach, though you'd have to be pretty committed to pursue it in the 10 stage. It's interesting that he talks about software, I've thought a couple of times if it's possible to produce generic board game design software but I'm still not sure.

It seems like it should be possible for most board games. All you really need are: a graph to represent the board locations and connections between them, user tokens on the board, user inventory off the board, and a rules engine to evaluate the rules of the game. That seems like it ought to be enough to get everything from risk to candy land.

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#23

Post by maroonblazer »

mmcconnell1618 wrote: post #20

Motown used a similar method where songwriting teams had to deliver x number of ideas per week and then the best ideas were pulled out for demos. The best demos were produced.

Late night comedy shows also. Many of the comedy writers interviewed on JR Havlan's excellent podcast "Writers' Bloc" [0] recount how writers or teams of writers will be given assignments - e.g. "Write 10 jokes about Trump's last speech" - then they'll pick a few, refine them and go with the best one.

[0]http://writersblocpodcast.com/

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#24

Post by overcast »

Basically just spitballing ideas. Pretty classic process for anyone creating things. Throw out a ton of ideas, and see if any stick. I try to get a new web project developed every month, if it gains some traction, continue development, if not, moved on to the next idea.

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#25

Post by bluedino »

>> Based on some selection criteria (which depend on my design goals and which I discuss below), I pick 10 of the 100 concepts

I used to try this as a teenager with QBASIC. I'd start writing down game ideas, but I'd always pick the 5 or so that I already knew I wanted to make. So why write down 2 pages of them?

I would probably have been better off drawing them out of a hat, working on them for a day and then just seeing where each one went.

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#27

Post by rektide »

I love Fogus's take on 100:10:1. As opposed to this highly linear ever-winnowing flow, Fogus uses 100:10:1 as a way to keep a list of spitballed ideas, a list of things he might want to work on that all have sincere promise, and one thing picked to focus on. Instead of being process driven, focusing on getting one thing done well, Fogus lets himself switch among his 10 picked items. The 10 is a way to swap out when interest wanes. 100:10:1, my approach to open source- http://blog.fogus.me/2015/11/04/the-100101-method-my-approac...

This process speaks to me a ton (a whole lot more than Nick's rigorous phased development process). When my attention and care for an interesting, creative project wanes, I can either dig in my heels and try to make myself code, or preferably I can switch to some other promising piece of development. Having a deck of other ideas decreases the context switch time- when a project is in a lul, there's already other great gems prepped, and one of them can re-inspire me.

Quite the contrast. I wonder how much of it is due to Fogus's focus on developing open source software, versus Nick' focus working on physical board games.

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#28

Post by gagege »

overcast wrote: post #24

Basically just spitballing ideas. Pretty classic process for anyone creating things. Throw out a ton of ideas, and see if any stick. I try to get a new web project developed every month, if it gains some traction, continue development, if not, moved on to the next idea.

It's good to be reminded of this process though. I tend to try to take on an epic project that I think is a good idea and then am crushed when it turns out it doesn't work.

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#29

Post by overcast »

gagege wrote: post #28
overcast wrote: post #24

Basically just spitballing ideas. Pretty classic process for anyone creating things. Throw out a ton of ideas, and see if any stick. I try to get a new web project developed every month, if it gains some traction, continue development, if not, moved on to the next idea.

It's good to be reminded of this process though. I tend to try to take on an epic project that I think is a good idea and then am crushed when it turns out it doesn't work.

The road to success is paved with failures!

Re: The 100:10:1 method – the heart of my game design process

#30

Post by dexterdog »

bluedino wrote: post #25

>> Based on some selection criteria (which depend on my design goals and which I discuss below), I pick 10 of the 100 concepts I used to try this as a teenager with QBASIC. I'd start writing down game ideas, but I'd always pick the 5 or so that I already knew I wanted to make. So why write down 2 pages of them? I would probably have been better off drawing them out of a hat, working on them for a day and then just se…

The idea is to consider anything in the first round. You can be more creative that way. Writing it down makes you do more than just think about it and dismiss it. Then you have to come back and review the list which gives it a second chance. How many great ideas just come and go because we don't dig deeply enough on them?
Post reply on HN