Confused? I wouldn't blame you if you were.
Over at the Adventure Gamers
forums there is a thread just started up on
Games Education. Being interested in the passing on of knowledge, I thought I'd look into this a little and from what I can gather, many course that profess to cover Game Design seem to think that it involves the creation of 3D character models, visualisation and even animation (among other things). Courses like this strike as being Visual Design for Games.
Game Design as a term is probably too broad a term, yet when I think of what I've done in my career, it's hard to think of it in any other way. For instance, my work on Broken Sword - The Sleeping Dragon included working on the story, the gameplay mechanics, the interface mechanics, the development tools (with programmers), the high-level gameplay sweep and many of the section breakdowns. Does everyone who considers themselves to be a game designer have such a broad role?
I thought about whether the industry should look at defining roles more clearly so that people know what's expected of them. Should Game Design be renamed, Gameplay Design? Or is it that the second is really a subset of the first? What happens when a game designer moves to a different company and suddenly finds that his job description is nothing like it was in his last position? Do designers in big development studios have a narrower role than those in smaller ones?
With a lack of clarity in the industry, is there any wonder that colleges and universities are misinterpreting what the terms actually mean? Let's open some debate and see if there are ways of not only helping the industry, but also ways of helping courses provide the right curriculum for their students.
Thoughts?