All podcast content by Mark Rosewater, transcript by https://otter.ai, editing by Lucas Harrington
And after being there one year, I decided that I wanted to give a speech. And so the following year, 2016, I did! I gave a speech. And I ended up having the highest rated speech of the whole convention. The following year, I ended up on the Ace of Spades that's on--the top 50 speeches end up on a deck of playing cards that they give away to all the speakers, so it's like a little thing to encourage you.
And I decided the year before, when I got the deck of playing cards, that my goal was to get on the playing cards. That was my goal. And the way it works is, it's random, except it's Ace of Spades if you're the top speaker. And so my goal was to get on the deck of cards. I did, but I--and when they told me how I did, I think I was rated like 16th or something.
But I think what it meant was, of every thing that got rated, not all the speakers, but of everything. And so the top 15 must have been non-speaker things. So like maybe, you know, the brunch. Who doesn't like the brunch, or whatever. So, I was surprised, I didn't know I was the top rated speaker until literally, they showed the new deck and I was on the Ace of Spades. So that was--anyway, that was really cool.
So anyway, I did that speech. I then wrote up a three-part article about it. And I decided to do a podcast. And so over the last--over two years, I've been doing 20 articles. Probably you've heard of them. But today is the final, the final one. So it's kind of exciting.
I, whenever I do a long series like this, somehow doing the last one's always fun for me, just to go, like, "I did it!" You know, like, I always worry that something will happen. I somehow won't finish my podcasts and the I won't finish the series! So I'm happy to get to the 20th one.
So, let me recap. Because lesson #20 has a lot to do with the first 19. Okay, so lesson number one was fighting against human nature is a losing battle. That lesson was all about how, look, you're designing for humans, and humans are pretty stubborn at times, and you have to sort of, you know, adapt your game to your audience, not your audience to your game.
Number two was aesthetics matter. I was talking a lot about, there's a lot of things that matter in your game, and that just a lot of little nuances in the how you create things and (???) and make things look, all those things lead up and matter to your audience. Partly because they're human, and they care about those things.
Number three, resonance is important. That was definitely talking about how having things that mean something to your audience really are valuable, and that the audience--that flavor and stuff really carries a lot of importance.
Which led to number four, make use of piggybacking. That is making use of prior knowledge of your audience to use that as a means to help them with your game. The idea being that if your audience already knows things, which they do, you can use that pre-existing knowledge to make it easier for them to understand what you're doing.
Number five, don't confuse interesting with fun. That was talking about the difference between intellectual stimulation and emotional stimulation. And that it's very easy for us to get--as we're making the game and the cerebral mists of making it, of getting really caught up in how it makes the audience think. But the point of this is, how it makes them feel has a larger impact on whether or not they like it.
Number six, understand what emotion your game is trying to evoke. And this is really talking about how you want to know what it is you're trying to get out of your audience.
Number seven was allow the player the ability to make the game personal. This was about customization, about giving your player choices, because if you give them choices, they will make individualized choices that really enhance the experience for them.
Number eight is the details of where the players fall in love with the game. And this was talking about how important all the little things you do, and that they're--everything will be noticed by somebody. Not that everybody will notice everything. But every little thing you do, there are people that will bond to that. And each person bonds to the game in a different way, and a lot of times it's the little tiny things that they feel only they noticed that really endear them to the game.
Number nine, allow your players to have a sense of ownership. This is really walking into the idea that you want the players to feel as if part of the game is theirs. It's not your game, but their game. And that you give them means in which to make elements of it that is their own.
On number 10, leave room for the players to explore. Don't tell them everything, let them find things. There's a lot of value in people finding stuff for themselves. That in fact, the way people tend to function is, when they discover it, it just means more than when you show it to them.
Number 11. If everyone likes your game, but no one loves it, it will fail. Talking about how games are competitive, and that you really need the passion from your user base. And that designing things so no one dislikes it is a recipe for disaster. And that you have to be less afraid about people not liking your thing. And more afraid that people aren't loving your thing.
That to succeed in this--games is pretty competitive. You need people really to fall in love with your game. And not everybody has to like it. Something that some people will love, others will hate. But that's okay. Getting strong emotions is better than not getting any strong emotions at all.
Number 12, don't design to prove you can do something. This talks a little bit about, when you're making things as the person making it. It's very easy to think of the act of making a game as a game itself. You know, you don't want to fall in that trap. Don't be doing things just to prove you can. Do things to maximize the game experience for your audience.
Number 13, make the fun part also the correct strategy to win. Understand what about your game is fun, and then make sure that the optimal way to win the game leads the people to the fun. That your audience will avoid the fun part of your game, if the game--in order to win the game, they'd have to avoid it. And don't make your game not fun because your audience--because you teach your audience not to do the part that is fun.
14, don't be afraid to be blunt. This talks about sometimes game designers have this fear of they can't be too on the nose. And not that you should always be blunt, you shouldn't. But at times you do want to be blunt, and that's okay to be blunt.
Number 15, design the component for the audience it's intended for. Not everybody will like every part of your game. Understand who the part you're making is for, and design it for that person. Don't worry about everybody liking it, worry about the person [who's] intended to like it.
[Sixteen,] be more afraid of boring your players than challenging them. There's this worry sometimes that if you try something crazy, it'll drive your players away. And as, I like to say, the biggest risk is taking no risks. That you really--your audience will forgive you for trying something bold, but they're much less forgiving when you bore them.
Number 17. You don't have to change much to change everything. Small incremental changes have a huge effect. And that a lot of times what will happen in the game is, just by changing a few things, sometimes even one single thing, the ramifications of that change will have a big impact on your game. And don't feel that in order to change things, you have to change a lot, because changing a few things really could impact that.
Number 18, restrictions breed creativity. It's talking about how it's okay--there's this myth that, like, you do your best work if there's no restrictions, and the reverse is actually true. The restrictions help give you guidance, and help push you in a direction. And that--don't be afraid of using restrictions as a means to help you, rather than worry as it's somehow getting in your way.
Number 19, your audience is good at recognizing problems and bad at solving them. Talks about using your audience as a sounding board to understand what is going right and wrong in your game. The audience doesn't have all the knowledge to fix those problems, because they don't know everything that goes into making it and you do. But they are a great sounding board to understand.
So those are the first 19 lessons. So what happened was, in the speech that I gave, every time I would give a lesson, I would put it in a little box up on the screen. And if you've ever seen my talk, you'll see this. I put it in the box.
And this is to set up the final lesson. So the final lesson is: All the lessons connect. And this is an interesting one, that one of the things that I realized--if you actually watched me give the talk, I--even as I'm giving the talk, I'm weaving them together. I'm talking--you know, there is a narrative flow. I did not pick these--they are not in random order. They are very much in order. And if you watch the talk, I very much am weaving them together. You know, I talk about how now, that you've done this thing, next you want to do that thing.
But so what I did was, every time I would give one lesson, I'd put it up on the screen, and it was in a little box. And then, at the end, I started stringing things together. About, well, if this is true then that is true. Like you know, for example, resonance is important. And then I talked about how piggybacking--make use of piggybacking. Well, piggybacking is all about using pre existing knowledge. And so if you use resonance, resonance leads you to allow you to do piggybacking.
These things all start clicking together. You know. That understanding, you know, getting somebody invested in the details is a way to give them their own sense of ownership. Because when they notice something little, they start piecing together something that feels like them. And customizing something for the audience also gives them a sense of ownership because they get to make something that's their own.
And so what I did on the screen was, I started piecing these all together. I started connecting them with all these lines. Now, originally, real quickly, this is a funny behind the scenes story. My original plan was to have a board. I wanted to make all the lessons and tie them together with yarn.
And so Jules Robins is one of my co workers, I asked him--I gave him the task of, take this board, put them together, and connect it with yarn, all the pieces that they connect. Find all the connections. And he made it and it was really intricate. And then what I realized was, there was no way to take a picture of it that really captured what it was.
And so what I ended up doing was, I ended up building--I used his--if you've seen the image that I use, where I tie everything together, it's actually me, visually electronically taking what he had built, and mimicking it. Like all the connections that he had made, are what I put on my thing.
But I did--I ended up doing it digitally, because it just--there was no way to take a picture of it--it looked cool to the human eye. But there was no way to take a picture of it that really connected. And then once I made a digital version, I was like, oh, I then could--I could construct this over time, as people are watching this. And once I had the digital component, I can bring in pieces.
I spent a lot of time on that, by the way. I hope that visual was cool. I spent a lot of time making that and piecing it all together. That's one of the things that probably took me hours and hours to make.
But the thing that I want is--and the reason I did that was, I really liked the idea. And the image that I wanted people to walk away with is that this is a web, that what I was teaching you was not 20 isolated things.
In fact, I joked in the thing that, you know, really what I was teaching you is one sort of, you know, kind of a top down approach to how I see game design, you know, a holistic approach.
But I knew--the funny thing was, when I originally came up with the idea--so in 2015, I went and I saw other people speak and I was very inspired. And I came up with the name or the concept for my speech during when I was at 2015. I knew the following year was gonna be my 20th year doing Magic. And I liked a lot the idea of, you know, there's a lot of lessons I wanted to teach.
And I liked the idea of 20 years, 20 lessons. That just seems really cool. I felt like 20 lessons in an hour, while it was tight, was something I can do. And I really was interested in doing something that was kind of very--well, one of the things that I enjoy when I sort of do speeches and stuff is I want to do something that's universal. I mean, obviously I use Magic as my examples. But I wanted to do something that was pretty universal, because I wanted to give a speech that other people could use.
And as it turns out, this speech has gone on to actually get a lot of attention. And it did what I wanted it to do, which was I wanted it to be a very open ended speech. I wanted it to be something that said, look. I don't care what game you are making. The stuff I'm talking about are universal game design ideas. They are not locked into any one particular game. They weren't just about Magic.
Now all of them apply to Magic. And obviously, as Magic--you know, I spent 20 years making Magic, all my examples--minus my one Plants vs. Zombies example were from Magic. But the thing I hoped, and obviously one of the things that I've seen is, that a lot of people have carried over this.
One thing that was very touching is how often I see other people quote my lessons in stuff they do. That usually is a sign of someone who gives a lecture, when you see other people in other lectures sort of reference you, it's a good sign, that means that something of what you've done has resonated with other people. So I'm honored whenever other people reference this talk or reference lessons from this talk. Anyway, I think it's very cool.
So the point that this lesson has, and the point of today is that I firmly believe I have a very holistic view of life. Everything is connected. I've done so many different podcasts on, you know, I'll just take things like improvisation or stand up comedy or writing a sitcom, things that I've just done in my life. And then I say, okay. Well, here's the lessons I learned from that thing. And those lessons, they all carry over. That everything you learn, you know, no matter what you're doing, the lessons you learn in life carry over and that they are all interconnected.
And so one of the things that I'm hoping, you know, the reason I wanted to end this talk with this final lesson is, I really want people to think of this of as--it really is one--it's not 20 lessons. I mean, I know I called it 20 Lessons, it really is kind of one big interconnected lesson.
And that--you know, as we've talked about different components--like, if you look at sort of how it's built, I start with a premise in the talk. And the first premise basically, is, look, you're designing for human beings. That is who you're making your games for. And we have a lot of quirks.
And a lot of what I talk about in the early part of the talk is saying, look, well, what does it mean that you're talking with humans? You know what I'm saying? Like, first off, I talk about how there's just expectations that humans have, and that they're stubborn. They're hard--it's hard to change human nature.
I talk about how aesthetics matter, because how we see the world, you know--how humans take in information is really important. And that there's a certain thing that feels right. So if you're making things for humans, okay, don't fight them, and then understand how they perceive things.
And then resonance is just talking about how, okay, look, human beings have come with existing knowledge in their head. And that when you take flavor and connect to things they know, you have a lot of advantages of doing that. When I talk about making use of piggybacking, it's just like, look, use that knowledge to your advantage.
But as you see, this is all is all interconnected. That being, you know, understanding what your audience needs and how they function means it's easy for you, a game designer, to help with that.
You know, when I talk about don't confuse interesting fun, I'm saying, look, humans are functionally emotional beings. Yeah, we have an intellectual side. And I'm not saying that your game can't have an intellectual side. But I was really sort of saying, look at the heart of it, when your audience is deciding whether it's something they want to return to, it's an emotional decision. It's not an intellectual one. And so I was trying to say, look, you got to make sure you understand the emotions.
So, I mean, the following lessons--understand what emotion your game is trying to evoke. Okay, I'm talking about how people make decisions emotionally. Okay, then understand what emotions you're trying to do.
I didn't get into talking about how to make the game personal. I'm clearly saying, okay, things are emotional. People are emotional, they make emotional decisions. You want them to bond with your game. How do you do that? Okay, well, the more you let them make it personal, that humans connect to things they have a personal bonding to. So let you do that. Make that happen.
I talked about the details, because the details are where that bonding is going to happen. If that little tiny thing is that moment you have in your game that just speaks to people. And I really was talking about how you want to get in deep, and that a lot of--it's the attention to detail that makes those little things that really bond to people.
The reason I talked about ownership is because you want people to have an emotional bond to something. Well, the more it is theirs, the more they connect to it, the more that it's not your game, but their game, the more they can emotionally bond with it.
And then when I talk about leaving room for players to explore, what I'm saying is, players connect to things personally and rank those higher. Well, let them find things, so the things they find, they found. Not that you've given them, but they found, it makes it more.
And all that ties into--I talked about how--people liking your game versus loving your game. Well, we want an emotional bond, right? We want to have the emotional high from the connection. Well, that is love. Love, you know, when somebody loves something, it's because it speaks to them on a strongly emotional level.
And once again, I'm not trying to besmirch the intellectual part of you. That can be there too. But it can't just be intellectual. You need to speak to them emotionally. So I'm really talking about how, okay, you want somebody to really fall for your game. Well, what happens if you don't? What happens if you just sort of apply to them intellectually and not connect to them emotionally? Well, then the end, they like it, but they don't love it. And if they don't love it, you're going to fail. You know what I'm saying? I'm sort of talking about why--you know, I spend a lot of time in the lessons talking about how you need to emotionally connect to them. And then I say, well, if you don't, look, your game fails. That you need to do that. You know.
I then started getting into stuff--the next batch of things talks about sort of, the making of games. So "Don't design to prove you can do something" really says, okay. On some level, the same way that you mistake intellectual-ness for making players like your game, it's the same trap you kind of fall in when making your game, of assuming that if you are intellectually stimulating yourself, it's helping your game.
The trap I call it is the game designers' game design trap, where you think of the making of a game itself as a game. Because you like games, obviously as a game player, because you're not gonna be a game designer if you're not a game player. And the making of a game has a lot of trappings to feel like a game. The problem is, the goal of the game and the goal of game design are a little bit different. And so you have to be careful not to fall in that trap.
The next thing, I talked about making fun--the correct strategy to win is another lesson I'm saying, okay, let's talk about how we make the game. So I'm then connecting, and one of the things to understand is, just like--I mean, really what I'm connecting is saying, look, these are different mistakes you'll make when building your game.
And these are connected. That if you are making your game for the wrong reasons, sometimes when you make your game, you design--you have your audience doing it for the wrong reasons. That I want you to be making the game and understand what your priorities are. And then when making the game for audience, understand what their priorities are.
Their priorities are enjoying themselves. For most games. I know there's games to do other things. But for most games, it's entertainment. And they want to win, but they want to have fun. And so it talks about how, look, you have to take them (???) and make sure that you're guiding them down the right path.
Don't be afraid to be blunt is me saying, okay, well, how do I make sure they go down the right path? I want--the previous lesson says, make sure that the fun part is the correct strategy. And what I'm saying is, you need to do the things you need to do, that sometimes you gotta be blunt. Sometimes you gotta push them in that direction. That I'm trying to show you that when you're making the game, understand the tools you have available to you. Understand what you're trying to do and understand the tools.
And when I talk about designing the component for the audience it's intended for, I'm like, okay, and another part of doing that is, you need to be blunt, and you need to understand who you're being directed at. In order to be blunt, you have to understand the audience. And so that lesson connects to the idea of, okay, you're trying to do this correctly, you're trying to build it the right way, you want to make sure they understand it. And in order to make sure they understand it, make sure you understand who they are.
Be more afraid of boring your players than challenging them ties into the idea that there's a lot of concern--one of the biggest mistakes that designers make is that they're afraid of upsetting people. They're afraid of doing the wrong thing.
And the funny thing is, the whole point of this lesson is that people connect positively stronger than negatively. That if they don't like something, like--when people love something, they're very willing to come back. And if they dislike something, as long as you give them something to love, you know, this idea that they have to like everything is just false. As long as people like elements of it, they don't need to like everything of it. That's okay. That if they find the parts of the game that they fall in love with, you know, the more you give them the ability to give ownership in the game, the more they'll find the way. Once again, even the lesson to the designer tie in to the lessons about the player.
You don't have to change much to change everything. That's another thing in the designing of the game, saying to you, hey, look, you don't--when you're trying to fix things, you can think in terms of more micro of what you're trying to fix. And all these lessons--once again, these lessons all talk about, look, when you're making the game, here's the different ways for you to do that.
Restrictions breed creativity. That's just me giving you a tool base of saying, look, when you get caught, when you get stuck, it's okay to give yourself limitations. It's okay to give yourself restrictions. That a lot of times the way to get out of being trapped is saying, okay, let me assume something. And, the other thing that I'm trying to say there is, a lot of the previous lessons talked about how there's things you need to do.
And a lot of times [designers] feel like if they have restrictions based on trying to do things for the players, that that's a problem. That they avoid giving themselves restrictions. And kind of what I'm saying here is no, no, no, as you do these other lessons that I'm giving you, yes, they're going to make restrictions. That is not only not a bad thing, it's a positive thing. It will help you with your game. That the restrictions are a blessing, not a curse. And so I'm sort of talking about as you're doing these things to fix the game, your attitude of how you look at it is important.
Talking about your audience as being good at stuff, that's another tool you have access to. And I'm sort of saying, look, make use of them. You need to make sure--like I talked about how you have to design it for the person that's intended to. Well, talk to the person that's intended to find out from them. You know what I'm saying? That a lot of me is saying, you know, when you're building your game, understand the resources you have available to you.
So as you can see, you know, in some ways these lessons break up into two components, really. The first half of the talk is more about what does the audience need, and how do you meet that. And the second half of the talk is talking about the tools of making things and how you can use that.
But the interesting thing, by the way, it kind of wraps around that the end of my--so I start by talking about your audience and what to expect of them and how to do things to maximize what they want. I get into some of the technicality of making games, but then I wrap around the end. Because the last lesson before the final lesson talks about how your audience is the tool for you to make the things you need to understand. And then I wrap right back around into, look, listen to your audience.
And so in some ways, the thing I like about this talk is, it definitely sort of follows the path, and then it comes back around. And that was kind of the point of the final lesson is that you literally could take any two lessons in my talk, and there is a bond between them. That you know, you can randomly--okay, we will do that, we will do the very exercise that I just said.
Okay, so I'm going to randomly pick two numbers. So let's see. I'm going to pick one from the first half and one from the second half. So the first half, I will pick 4, and the second half, I will pick 13. I just did that.
Okay, so #4 is make use of piggybacking, and #13 is make the fun part also the correct strategy to win. But what are those that have to do with each other? Okay, so if I'm trying to piggyback something, the whole point of piggybacking is making use of existing things the players will like. Well, if the fun part--if you want to make the fun part, part of the strategy, make sure you understand which part of the resonance is the most fun part for the audience.
And that one of the ways of making sure they understand something is making sure that the fun part of the resonance is also tied to the fun part of the game. So what you can do is you can say, okay, I really need them to do thing X. I know that this part is one of the most resonant parts of my game. Okay, well, I'm going to make sure that I tie the mechanical thing that's most important that they understand to the resonant thing that I know that I'm most excited about.
That one of the things you get to do when you're piggybacking stuff is, you get to take the things that are resonant, and figure out how to use them. And so one of the ways to do that is that you can say, okay, I'm making, you know, genre X.
For example, let's say you're making a Japanese-inspired game. Well, ninjas are super popular in pop culture. They're real popular. So maybe that's something that's really important. My game, I let the ninjas do it because the ninjas are something I just know the audience is going to be pretty connected to. And that, you know, most of our audience is going to go ooh, ninjas, and they'll want to play with the ninjas. So I put something mechanically important into the ninjas.
And that--so, my point here is that you can do this with any two lessons. All the lessons connect. It is not me saying, oh, you know, oh, well, just the ones next to each other connect. I mean, I put them in an order for flow, but any ones connect.
So let's try that one more time. Okay, so 1 through 10, I will pick 7. And 11 through 20, I will pick 12. So 7 is, allow the player the ability to make the game personal. And 12 is, don't design something to prove that you can.
Okay, how do these connect? So, a lot of the player's ability to make something personal talks about customization. Talks about how--that what you want the audience to do is handpick the things that matter. Okay, don't design things to prove that you can is talking about how the game designer has to be careful not to fall in the trap of making it a game for themselves.
And so what I would say there is, when you're making a game, make sure that you are making the game customizable, not to you. Like one of the big traps that falls into when you start thinking the game is something that's a game--game design is a game for you, you start making it fun for you to play, or to design, actually. And so one of the things to keep in mind is--and one of the ways to not make it personal--one of the ways is that when you keep in mind that I'm trying to make it personal for the player, I'm trying to give options for the player, that the way I like to think of it is, one of the ways to keep it from being about you is to always keep it about being about the player.
That one of the things I like to keep in mind is--and this is sometimes a tricky thing. You have a great fondness for your game, you have a bonding with your game. I'm not saying you don't connect with your game. It's yours. It's your creation. Clearly you have bonding with it. But to make the best game, you have to remember that the audience for the game is not you, the audience is the audience.
And that I think a lot of the traps people fall into when they kind of do things to prove they can is that they are making the game for them. They're making the making of the game for them. And that one of the things I always want to remind people is that whenever you're making something, who is it for? Who are you making any one component piece for? And having an understanding of that.
And I think the more that you recognize that you're designing for other people and not for yourself, the easier it is not to fall in the trap of doing things just to prove that you can.
Because one of the things I find is, sometimes I will get in the trap of making something because I'm making it more to prove I can. And when I ask myself, who is it for? I go, oh, I don't know who this is for. And that when you find yourself making a component, and you can't answer who it's for, the answer might be, it's for you. And it's not for one of the audience of your game.
And so that that is a good way to see that, to connect that. Is, if you're always asking who the components are for, and you can't answer that, that usually is a sign that you've gone a little bit astray.
Anyway, this is fun. I'm gonna do one more time, just because I have a little more work to do. Okay, so one through 10, I will pick 2, and from 11 through 20, I will pick 17. No, no, I did 17 already, didn't I? 15. Okay, so 2 is aesthetics matter. And 15 is design the component for the audience it's intended for.
Okay, so design is--I talk about how you want to understand who the audience member is. And I say aesthetics is important. Well, those are very interconnected. Meaning, if you understand who the audience is for, you'll understand which aesthetics is best for them. That's another thing to understand, which is, when I say aesthetics matter, that doesn't mean there's a universal aesthetic that always applies to everybody. Different audience members will like different things. So one of the things to understand is, you need to know who the component you're making it for, and take into account what aesthetic you're using.
For example, one of the things I've seen in games is that games will push component-making to different audiences. For example in Magic is, there are people in Magic that like a lighter tone, and there are people in Magic that like a more serious tone. And so if you notice, we're very careful about where we put the silly tone versus the serious tone.
So like, one of the things, for example is--I mean it's not a mistake, for example, that the Un-sets have more comedy in them. That the very nature of what we're doing in the Un-sets is trying to play into the idea that the game doesn't have to be so serious. You know, we're doing a lot of things that the normal game doesn't do, because the black-bordered rules have to be very precise for tournaments.
So the idea that we're playing in sort of fun space--like there's a correlation between the choice of humor, and the kind of mechanics we're playing around with. Likewise, when we play around with mechanics, something like coin flipping, where that is not specifically made for tournaments, because we don't like having high overt randomness in tournaments, that allows us to sort of when we design those, we know the audience is a little more of a casual audience. And so we tailor our creative for that.
So the idea is, the aesthetics matter. The aesthetics are unique upon people, not all people want the same aesthetics. I mean, there are some general human nature things that are true. But there are also--understand your audience, and that you get to think about who the audience is for each component, and the aesthetics you use for that component, and the resonance used for that component matters.
And so the idea there is, when you're thinking about who the component is for, every facet of what you do--not just the mechanical elements of it, but the creative elements of it, how maybe for Magic, how we name it, what kind of art, the style of art, all that comes into play when we're talking about what we're making things for.
Anyway, the reason I'm doing this little exercise is A. is I have time, and B. I kind of wanted to demonstrate that literally any two pieces connect. that there are--that what I'm talking about is really at its base--in some ways, the first half and the second half are really just mirror images of the same point anyway. The first half's talking a little bit more about the player and who the player is. And the second is talking about the designer and the tools of the designer.
But those are super interconnected. The tools the designer uses stem from the fact of what's effective with the audience. You know, it's not a mistake that certain tools are used. Those are the tools that work. And the tools work because they speak to the audience.
And so really, when I'm talking, I'm just sort of hitting a lot of the same things is, the key to being good at the craft of game design is just an interesting--it's understanding. It's understanding who the audience is, understanding who you are, understanding what tools you have access to, and how those tools impact the audience you're designing for.
And that is why, when you sort of take my whole talk and put it all together, I'm not really--it is not as if I'm--I'm not hitting a lot of isolated things. I'm hitting a very cohesive connective tissue.
And that boils down to--I mean, there are different people who teach game design. You know what I'm saying? I'm not the only one. This is my take on game design. And my take on game design really boils down to the following premise, which is that of the idea of, you're designing for humans. You know. That, understand humans. Understand what they want. Understand what they want out of a game. Understand what you what you need to do to get those things out of them.
And that a lot to me, you know, I've been doing this now for almost 23 years. And a lot of what I've learned is that the key to making good games is knowing what the audience wants, and what tools you have available to give that to them.
And that--I mean, one of the interesting things about making the exact same game, I mean, a lot of people are in the game industry for a long time. The thing that's unique about me is, there are not a lot of games that exists continually for so many years.
Because most games that last a long time get made, and then there's no more content made for them. Okay, Monopoly's existed for a long time. But there's not a lot of new Monopoly content. There's a little I guess, but not not a lot.
And that Magic is this unique game, where we're constantly--the nature of what the game is, it's we keep having to make more content. So it's a game that both has lasted a long time, and continually makes new content. That's a pretty rare animal.
And on top of that, I've been doing it continually this whole time. And so, you know, one of the things that's been interesting for me is, it really has made me have to dig in pretty deep. That, you know, when you make a game, there's things you have to do. But when you make more components for the game, you know, you got to go beneath the surface.
Like one of the things about when you first make a game is, if you've created a good amount of design depth, you have a lot of place to play around in. And early on, you'll be kind of wasteful of your design resources. Because, you know, most games aren't made for 20 some years, and that you you kind of--you know, games that have a lot of depth to them, you get to use that depth pretty quickly. Because there's, you know, you're not kind of saving it for 20 years.
But Magic has gotten into a situation where like, okay, we have the game, it's gone on for--this is our 20th anniversary this year, I expect this to go on another 25 years. In fact, I expect this to keep going. I believe I will die and the game is gonna be far healthier than I will be if I'm dead. But at my wake people will play Magic, and hopefully remember me and have fun.
And I think that part of working on a game in which I'm constantly sort of trying to make sure that I'm saving space, you know, that I'm conserving stuff, it's made me look at games in a very interesting way. That I've gotten very--you have to look in a lot in order to sort of do the job that I do.
And so a lot of the point of my speech was to sort of teach you some of the lessons that I'd picked up. There's lots of other lessons. I think that each person has their own way of doing things. And part of what I want to say is my lessons are for you to interpret, to use the way that you see fit. I'm trying to provide some truisms that help people.
And that one of the things that's really nice is, I get letters all the time from different people in game design. You know, the fact that I've been writing about game design for so long means that there's a lot of people that currently now make games that, you know, at some level, at some point were able to--I had some influence on them. And they'll write to me, write super nice letters. And a lot of times after talks some people come talk to me.
And you know, when I went to GDC It was nice. Because like, seems like everybody in GDC plays Magic. So it means a lot to me that these lessons, you know, definitely have carried on. And like I said, this is my take on game design. I want all of you to get your take on game design.
It is not--my belief in in teaching about this is not that there's a definitive answer, that there's one way to do everything. It's more of--I'd like to talk about, here are general things I've learned and apply those that make sense in what you're doing.
Every game is different. You know, I make Magic. It's a trading card game. It's a physical game. It's got art on it. You know, it has a lot of components that not every game necessarily has.
And so there's things unique about my game that are very different from other games. So that's why I made my lessons kind of broad, because each game has its own requirements and its own restrictions.
But I do think that the lessons I did, because they were pretty broad lessons, hopefully most of them apply, they might not all apply, but most of them should apply. And you know, I want to sort of wrap this up, because I just got to work, to thank everybody for all the kind words about this whole series, about the original speech. You know, there's not a lot of times when you sort of make something that has the lasting effects that the speeches had. And it was really cool to put together. And it's been really fun to see people responding to it. It gets quoted all the time. And that's a big honor to me.
So I just want to--and for all of you, assuming you actually listened to all 20 of these. So originally, I did this over 20 podcasts. So if you've been listening to all 20 podcasts, let me end by applauding you and thanking you. The fact that each of these lessons itself was something I could talk about for a whole podcast kind of shows you the depth of all this stuff. So hopefully you enjoyed it. I hope you enjoyed this whole talk. Hope you enjoyed the original talk. I hope you enjoyed the podcast.
But, as I always say, I'm now parked. So we all know that means, it means the end of my Drive to Work. So instead of talking Magic, and the 20 lessons, it's time for me to be making Magic. I hope you guys enjoyed the whole talk, enjoyed the series, and I'll see you all next time. Bye bye.
