Good Ideas make for Bad Designers — (Part 2 of 3)
<p><em>Game designer</em>, or simply <em>designer</em>, is not an easy job to explain. For how many times I’ve tried to explain it to my parents and their friends, I know it is a way more abstract activity than Artist, Programmer, or even Producer. I usually describe it as “defining the rules of the game, the way the different systems should behave and interact, in order to create the intended experience for the player”. Sooo clearly, it doesn’t dispel all questions.</p>
<p>And so I get why you could try to reduce it to “imagining games” or “having ideas for games”. But as we explored in <a href="https://leolesetre.medium.com/good-ideas-make-for-bad-designers-part-1-or-3-1a94fdbcf12e" rel="noopener"><strong>part 1</strong></a>, there is little base in reality, if any, to support the belief that the role of designers is to have ideas or that successful projects are based on good ideas.</p>
<p>And we could stop here, but I argue that we should actively challenge this perception. We should not settle for this oversimplified version of reality because this perception shapes more than just how we explain design. It shapes what aspiring designers expect, what we expect from them, and how we perceive the role of all the other actors of the industry as well.</p>
<p><a href="https://leolesetre.medium.com/good-ideas-make-for-bad-designers-part-2-of-3-58ad72f98556"><strong>Read More</strong></a></p>