THE DESIGN OF INDIE GAMES, A DIFFERENT PARADIGM by Enrique Alejandro Pérez Domínguez, “KIX” A dissertation presented to Bayreuth University in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of PhD First Supervisor Prof. Dr. Jochen Koubek Second Supervisor Prof. Dr. Jens Junge 1 Diese Dissertation von der Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung für die Freiheit mit Mitteln des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung gefördert wurde. 2 Dedicated to Koala and Koali 3 SUMMARY This dissertation explores thoroughly the design of the so-called indie games. It portrays in detail the design activities undertaken by indie designers and the design context in which indie games are devised. With this knowledge, a comparison with game design as it has been formulated by academics and game industry veterans is undertaken. This with the purpose of finding out if the design of indie games represents a different paradigm in regard to game design. This work takes the reader through a series of chapters providing the epistemological context to analyze comparatively the design of indie games and game design. The indie games movement is defined and contextualized within indie cultures and put in perspective in relation with mainstream games. The historical and theoretical foundations of game design are also covered. And to get an understanding around what designing implies, theories from the disciplines of design, engineering, architecture and product design are explained. Thirty award-winning designers of indie games at Indiecade and the Independent Games Festivals of the Game Developers Conference participated in this research providing accounts on their repertoire of design activities. These accounts were analyzed using design theoretical standpoints and then composed as a case of study to be compared with game design. This dissertation is not only of interest for those readers who want to expand their knowledge about game design and identify the similarities and divergences between the design of indie games and game design. This work appeals to all those who want to understand exactly how the design of games in general happens; a perspective that has not yet been provided in game studies. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I thank my family and friends. I thank my supervisors Prof. Dr. Jochen Koubek and Prof. Dr. Jens Junge for their support. All my gratitude for the supervision, proof-reading and patience throughout my PhD to Dr. Sonia Fizek, Georgina Guillen Hanson, Dr. Anne Dippel and Dr. Fabrizio Poltronieri. Without your help I would have never got this far! Special thanks to Prof. Leslie Johnson, Dr. Miguel Sicart and Dr. Raul González Pinto, for the recommendation letters and the filling out of university forms for me to get a place in a PhD program or for a scholarship call. Thanks to the people at the Friedrich Naumann Stiftung für die Freiheit for the support throughout the three years of funding of my PhD: Dr. Kathleen Klotchkov, Dr. Wolther von Kieseritzky and Claudia Penno. I also would like to thank Prof. Dr. Dirk Linowski for the numerous endorsing letters every time I needed to extend my scholarship. To all of you that in a way or another have helped me reach this point: Katya Muñoz, Dr. Niklas Schrape, Prof. Dr. Emanuel Guardiola, Prof. Dr. Andreas Rauscher, Prof. Dr. Armand Hatchuel, Prof. Dr. Pascal Le Masson, Stéphanie Brunet, Jonathan Barbara, Klemen Lilija, David Scheele, Dr. Aki Järvinen, David Lindlbauer, Kieran Nolan, Prof. Dr. Rainer Malaka, Lies van Roessel, Elena Martins, Eva Querengässer, Martijn Kors, Daniel Bühler, Daniel Hessler, Moritz Barske, Andreas Bloess, Dr. Jaap Daalhuizen, Dr. Roger Herz-Fischler, Dr. Ruth Tatlow, Dr. Michelle Phillips, Adam Rafinski, Prof. Gilbert Beronneau, Dr. Sebastian Möring, Dr. Scott Gaule, Dr. Paolo Ruffino, Dr. Daniel Johnson, Dr. Charles Walker and Prof. Dr. Marc Erich Latoschik. All my gratitude to all the indie designers of games that participated in this research. I appreciate every single minute of your attention for the interviews as well as for email replies. Thank YOU ALL!: Daniel Benmergui, AP Thomson (Hexecutable), Alina Constantin (Tiny Red Camel), Jim McGinley (Big Pants), Auriea and Michaël (Tales of Tales), Jason Roberts, Patrick Smith (Vectorpark), Terry Cavanagh, Logan Olson (Hard Light Labs), Brendon Chung (Blendo Games), Ditto, Andy Schatz (Pocketwatch Games), Erik Svedang, Ed Key (Twisted Tree Games), Nathalie Lawhead (Alienmelon), Nina Freeman (Star Maid Games), Lucas Pope, Justin Ma (Subset Games), Douglas Wilson (Die Gute Fabrik and Copenhagen Game Collective), Ezra White Hanson (XRA), Matt Meyer and Brent Calhoun (Super Chop Games), Tom Sennett, Richard Boeser (Sparpweed), Eddy Boxerman (Hemisphere Games), Anders Gustafsson (Cockroach Inc.), James Earl Cox III (Seemingly Pointless), Danny Day (QCF), David Kanaga, Felix Bohtasch (Broken Rules), Alistair Aitchenson, Chris Bell, Peter Curry and Robert Curry (Dino Polo Club), Marek Plitchka, Steffan Mikaelsson, Robin Baumgarten, Greg Snyder and Myles Nye (Wise Guys) and Thomas Grip (Fictional Games). 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................... 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................. 6 LIST OF VISUAL AIDS ................................................................................................................. 9 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 11 RESEARCH QUESTION AND HYPOTHESIS ................................................................................ 13 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................... 14 PREVIOUS RESEARCH ON INDIE GAMES AND ON DESIGN AS HUMAN ACTIVITY ................... 15 CONTRIBUTION OF THIS DISSERTATION ................................................................................. 16 OUTLINE OF THE DISSERTATION ............................................................................................. 16 TERM DISAMBIGUATION ......................................................................................................... 18 CHAPTER 2: THE INDIE GAMES MOVEMENT ............................................................................ 20 INDIE GAMES ........................................................................................................................... 20 THE MOVEMENT OF INDIE GAMING: DISCOURSES, TRAITS AND BACKGROUND ................... 22 UNDERSTANDING THE INDIE CONCEPT .................................................................................. 27 INDIE GAMES AS THE “RADICAL” OTHER ................................................................................ 32 INTRICATE DISCOURSES AND TENSIONS BETWEEN THE INDIE GAMES MOVEMENT AND THE INDUSTRY ................................................................................................................................ 36 INDIE GAMES BEYOND OR OUTSIDE AN OPPOSING INDUSTRY .............................................. 40 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 42 CHAPTER 3: HISTORICAL AND THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON GAME DESIGN ......................... 44 GAME DESIGN: DEFINITIONS AND FOUNDATIONS ................................................................. 45 BRIEF HISTORY OF AND CURRENT TRENDS IN GAME DESIGN ................................................ 51 PROMINENT GAME DESIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND THEIR PRACTICAL APPLICATION ............ 57 GAME DESIGN FOR THE DESIGN OF INDEPENDENT GAMES ................................................... 70 NOTES ON THE NATURE OF GAME DESIGN ............................................................................ 72 GROUDING THE CONTRIBUTION OF THIS DISSERTATION WITHIN GAME DESIGN ................. 74 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 75 CHAPTER 4: LENSES FOR THE STUDY OF THE DESIGN OF GAMES............................................... 77 STEPPING INTO THE REALM OF DESIGN AS FIELD OF INQUIRY .............................................. 78 DESIGN AS HUMAN ACTIVITY: DEFINITIONS ....................................................................... 79 6 COMMON PARADIGMS FOR THE STUDY OF DESIGN .............................................................. 80 PROBLEM-SOLVING ............................................................................................................. 81 REFLECTION-IN-ACTION ...................................................................................................... 82 CLARIFICATION ON BOTH PROGRAMS ................................................................................ 83 DESIGN PROBLEMS, DESIGN SOLUTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS ................................................ 84 DESIGN PROBLEMS .............................................................................................................. 84 DESIGN SOLUTIONS ............................................................................................................. 85 DESIGN CONSTRAINTS ........................................................................................................