It's the principle, it's the issue

After doing IT at QUT, I'm pretty much set in group work. I've had at least 2 group assignments per semester, in a variety of subjects. Some for business, many for programming, others for web site development, and even trying to work out algorithms for AI. And then all of a sudden, enter 016. Fundamentals of Games Design. Suddenly, I'm in a team where we aren't working on creating some massive codebase, or examining how to get C++ and Java to talk (or Tawk as we put it), but rather creativity is required of me. I have to try to categorise and invent "fun". Not just that, I have to do it with two people who have an almost identical experience to mine.

It's funny. I've done a software design subject where they taught us that is useful for programmers to have some sort of idea as to how software should be designed, what classes to write, what return types to use and what have you. It turns out the same is probably true in the games industry, especially if you want to climb the ranks to becoming a producer (like I do).

Initially, I found it quite a bit of a step up from other group assignments I had done before. Instead of there being some set structure to research, there was now something to create based on some principles with a much broader requirement than "write a program that...". Now I had to help design entertainment, something which is incredibly hard to assess. And since this is the case, it's equally hard to create. This has been my experience, and I can finally say I sympathize with all those game designers who've been frustrated when their ideas don't work.

I can also fully understand the statement "just because you think something is a good idea for a game doesn't mean others will share your opinion". I think this was more something we discovered as a group, when we had an initial design that sounded like a lot of fun (and on paper it certainly did). When another group member thought it was a bit sketchy with some good points, we quickly saw he was right. Admittedly, we were left a bit distraught (especially as a deadline was approaching). He was right, of course, the game wouldn't have worked, and would've ended up being a lesser version of an existing title. Not with the level of innovation we had conjured up, at least.

On the note of innovation, I made another key discovery in the confines of our group. No matter how much you try, innovation is not something you can force. All you can really do is create an environment for creative ideas, which is what we fostered as much as we could, by

• Many brainstorming sessions in the length of hours
• Constant bouncing of ideas, and
  
• An openness to try something new.

Even with these great principles, we did not have the necessary innovations in the area of character progression that would've been needed to bring our game into reality. At least not within our time frame. By the way, our game idea was a Guitar Hero RPG, which is still not forever lost. But within the context of this unit, unfortunately it has to be.

So for me, participating in my group has been a real stretch, just based on the fact that the focus of our efforts was a piece of entertainment as opposed to my previous code monkey experiences. I must say it has been an irreplaceable experience for me (and I really do mean that). The challenges I faced in the group have certainly refined my views on game design and the creation of "fun". Perhaps another time I'll talk more about some of my experiences more specifically with the other group members, and hopefully arrive with a fuller picture of what doing this group assignment has helped me realize.