With the advancement of gaming hardware and software storage capacities, many game developers and players believe that games should contain the most content possible. This mindset has led to games with dozens of uninspired side quests, swaths of hallow achievements, and tons of breadth yet not depth in core gameplay mechanics. Rather than nailing a game’s best features, many designers throw every single idea they have at the player. While this decision provides lots of gameplay, it dilutes the overall experience by executing an imprecise/nonspecific vision. One design philosophy called Design by Subtraction counters this notion by emphasizing a game’s core gameplay mechanics in addition to removing superfluous/peripheral gameplay features. For example, instead of creating a game that takes sixty hours to beat with a mediocre combat system, a generic story, and a thoughtful yet underexplored puzzle mechanic, a game made with Design by Subtraction would feature a game that takes ten hours to beat with one phenomenally tight combat system. Focusing on quality rather than quantity, Design by Subtraction is one game design approach that crafts thoughtful, deeply explored game mechanics to satisfy the player.
Emphasize core gameplay
By emphasizing a game’s core gameplay, Design by Subtraction helps retain what makes a given game so unique and entertaining. The Mario franchise is a longstanding embodiment of Design by Subtraction because its main games’ central platforming gameplay mechanics remain unhindered by peripheral features, such as story. In Super Mario 64, for instance, the player begins by reading a few short sentences of plot that help contextualize gameplay. Afterwhich, he/she is free to enjoy the game’s beginning. For repeat players, the story may as well be removed because it contributes little to the overall experience. After all, the player does not play Super Mario 64 for story, he/she does so to enjoy tightly controlled platforming. Game development is a limited process, and if designers invested more in Super Mario 64’s story, they would subsequently have to invest less in its platforming. Doing so could dilute the game’s competitive advantage of platforming. Although the spinoff Paper Mario franchise incorporates story - and successfully because of its strong commitment to story - the central Mario franchise largely ignores it for core gameplay of platforming precision.
While Super Mario 64 had a brief story, other games ignore story completely for their intended message. The Witness does so to better execute its puzzle-solving gameplay. This enigmatic puzzle masterpiece opens with no dialogue, cutscene, or explanation. Much like its puzzles, The Witness drops the player in an ambiguous scenario where problem-solving leads to more problem solving. Additionally, the game omits music. Music in puzzle-solving games is difficult to compose because it should complement, yet not take away from gameplay that requires focus. To avoid this gamble, The Witness only incorporates soft atmospheric sound effects, not music. While some could argue that The Witness varies its gameplay throughout its peripheral walking simulator mechanics, such movement actually contributes further to the puzzle-solving gameplay. After all, the player mainly walks to move from one puzzle to another. Additionally, the player looks for hidden puzzles while walking. These functions in walking illustrate how the game’s less important mechanics serve its main mechanics of puzzle-solving. By emphasizing such puzzle-solving gameplay, The Witness boasts highly concentrated and richly satisfying puzzle-solving gameplay that immortalizes the game as a zeitgeist of the genre.
Less distractions
In addition to improving games by capitalizing on their main features, Design by Subtraction assists games by trimming their unnecessary fat. “Kill your darlings” is a phrase commonly used in writing to remind writers that no matter how much they adore one aspect of their work, it should be removed if it does not substantially serve their main argument. In terms of game design, “kill your darlings” refers to removing any unnecessary features in a game that do not substantially contribute to the game’s central mechanic or message. Tetris, the Russian classic, embodies this emphasis of quality over quantity with its timeless puzzle-solving gameplay. In addition to its core gameplay’s fluidity and approachability, what makes Tetris a hallmark game is its absence of unnecessary features/mechanics. Tetris is all about dropping shapes made of four blocks in smart patterns. That is all. It does not have voice acting, cutscenes, a compelling story, or social commentary. And that is perfectly fine. Tetris’s goal as a game is to entertain the player with falling blocks, and it successfully accomplishes that goal by avoiding additional content that may inhibit or take away from that mission. This sense of focus or concentrated gameplay maintains the player’s attention because he/she does not have to cognitively shift between discrepant gameplay experiences. Thus, by removing peripheral features that do not directly serve central gameplay, Tetris keeps the player engaged and committed to such central gameplay.
Although in an extreme thematic difference, Pac-Man Championship Edition 2 Plus embodies a similar approach of ignoring additional features and mechanics that could distract from its high-octane fun. In this game, the player has five minutes to score the most points possible by eating pellets and chomping ghosts. What differentiates it from classic Pac-Man is its intensity. Levels feature powerful EDM as Pac-Man zips through the quickly completable stages. In a heart-pounding flurry of colors, Pac-Man eventually enters a final showdown against a giant boss ghost. By pouring intensity into the game’s speed, music, color, and gameplay, it provides a rich player experience built upon excitement. Every included feature serves the purpose of synthesizing an exhilarating run. The important point is that the game does not feature mechanics that halfheartedly serve this purpose. By aligning its various aspects to enhance the core gameplay experience, Pac-Man Championship Edition 2 Plus creates a unified message that the player can approach. As a result, the player is not overwhelmed by several different, potentially conflicting, types of gameplay. Once again, this purposeful focus on the game’s main experience helps keep the player engaged because he/she does not have to juggle between several different gameplay experiences. By concentrating and unifying gameplay to one style, Pac-Man Championship Edition 2 Plus removes half-baked features that could distract the player and subsequently lower the overall gameplay experience.
A bad example
Occasionally, it helps to illustrate the effectiveness of an approach by highlighting how things go wrong without it. In terms of Design by Subtraction, look no farther than Splatoon 2’s most commonly endured design flaw: intrusive and unskippable dialogue. Whenever the player starts Splatoon 2, two quirky characters lengthily address what current stages/features are available. Instead of providing a quick, optional infographic, the game drudges the player along this excessive and boring one-sided conversation. This opening is slow, nonautonomous, and colorless - completely antithetical to Splatoon 2’s lively, self-directed, and colorful gameplay. With this opening, the player receives mixed messages about what the game will offer; is the game a text-based adventure, or a first-person shooter? If designers of Splatoon 2 employed Design by Subtraction, they would find a way to remove this inundation of boredom so that the player can sooner enjoy the game’s inherently satisfying gameplay. Trim the fat and prepare the main course: that is the mentality behind Design by Subtraction and how it often elevates games to a higher standard of excellence.
A good exception
While Design by Subtraction is an effective design choice that typically improves games, it is now law. Many games can find a balance between their core gameplay mechanics and their peripheral gameplay features. Super Mario 3D World did so with its Captain Toad side levels. While the game centrally involves multiplayer platforming chaos, it additionally included one-player Captain Toad missions as a calming break from the game’s central multiplayer mayhem. These Captain Toad missions offered cheeky puzzle-solving - a different type of gameplay from Super Mario 3D World’s core gameplay - yet retained player engagement because they acted as a palate cleanser. In this role, Captain Toad side stages relieved players who were weary from the game’s tight central gameplay. Additionally, the levels maintained an exceptional degree of quality and depth, so much so that designers quickly realized these Captain Toad side stages’ potential and later made them a game of their own: Captain Toad Treasure Tracker. Because they offered helpful variety and demonstrated exceptional quality, Super Mario 3D World’s Captain Toad side stages positively assisted the central gaming experience. Their inclusion, however, conflicts with the singularity in approach that Design by Subtraction advocates. As a result, Design by Subtraction remains a worthwhile philosophy, not law, to effective game design.
Conclusion
Games have become disheveled. In their aims of providing the player everything, some games provide the player nothing special. Design by Subtraction counters this trend by accentuating a game’s best gameplay and removing additional features that do not serve such central gameplay. Some critics call this approach limited due to a lack of gameplay diversity; however, Design by Subtraction produces profound gameplay diversity in the depth of one gameplay mechanic. The Witness is a game about solving line puzzles, but with its over 500 puzzles, the player enjoys a considerable amount of gameplay diversity and complexity in these line puzzles. Ultimately, Design by Subtraction comes down to a desire for quality in gameplay. And with such quality, designers separate their games from others in their delivery of a worthwhile player experience. A 6/10 sixty-hour game cannot compete with a 9/10 ten-hour game. Similarly, I could write more on this, but my point is made.
Comentários