Okay, let's talk about making tiny games and why it's easier said than done.

Recently, I was listening to an episode of Eggplant with the game developer sylvie, in which it was mentioned that she has made something like over a hundred games over her career. This filled me first with shock and then with dread. How can someone make that much stuff? And why the fuck am I struggling to make a single damn thing?

In the interview, sylvie mentioned this piece, which I realized had been sent to me by one @twky a bit ago, “How to Make Small Games” by John Thyer.

One of the main things Thyer wants to convey here is the concept of games making promises to players. Essentially, these promises tell us what to expect from the game, and can be communicated in a lot of different ways. I think this is a really valuable and interesting way of thinking about goals as a game designer. It’s not the only way! But it’s very clear to me that this can help set scope as a designer.

But I will be blunt. I have a hard time swallowing a lot of this. Both in the sense that I feel a desire to reject that it is perhaps irrational, but also that I feel many of these points are disagreeable. Specifically, what I really don’t jive with is how it talks about ambition. It says it wants to meet readers halfway, but I think it sort of fails in those moments. Thyer says we need to change our perspective and we’ll have more fun. That’s easier said than done! And the author himself doesn’t seem fully convinced, either, given how the piece ends. Yet the text seems to almost shame ambitious developers, telling them they should play more small games instead, stop trying to surprise players, and let their dreams die. This is profoundly discouraging to read.

But I also know that I am biased because I have dreams of games, dreams that will likely never go anywhere. But I don’t want to give them up, because they’re mine, and I like them, and I want to keep them. Is that wrong, then? Should I give up on those big dreams, kill my darlings? I’m not sure I ever will, but maybe that’s my downfall.

Now, here’s the thing: I do have dreams of games that are small, too. I’m not someone who is all that grandiose. And I’ve made Twine games. I’ve toyed with bitsy. I’ve played and enjoyed many small games. I have no shortage of small little ideas I know I could make, know I have the means to make, know I could if I set myself to do it. But you see, I haven’t.

The problem, I think, is two-fold: unchecked executive dysfunction, and yes, that pesky ambition. And I think these are linked in a pretty key way here. The art I get excited about making, the art I want to produce, and the creative work that gets me really going, these aren’t always little things. I have written many short stories, short poems, composed little melodies. But a little game doesn’t often spring out of me. Part of it is because of how much has to come first. I have to do all this stuff before I even get to the creative part, to make what? A game I have to convince myself first that I want to make in the first place? It’s always going to be easier to get excited about making something raw and molten spewing out of some inner furnace.

As an example, I’ve been working on a Twine game for several years now. Not dedicated work, mind you, but occasionally returning to it from time to time. Currently, it’s around 14,000 words long, and maybe two-thirds done. The irony is that I wanted this to be a small project I could bang out to publish pseudonymously. But then it grew, not feature creep, but a creep of meaning, a creep of excitement. I was excited about what I was doing, and so I kept making more, and now it’s burdened by all the promises I’ve made, not to an audience, but to myself about what I think it needs to be.

Artists often have big dreams. I was thinking a bit about this because of a video from the channel Little Joel where he talks about how, despite trying to force himself to take it less seriously, he just kept returning to that. I think part of being a person is struggling to square what you want and what you have. Part of being an artist is squaring what you want to make with what you can make.

Many artists are able to revel in the state of process without any concern for product. I can get there sometimes, sometimes when I am playing music. But I don’t get some deep resonating joy from writing, which is why I’ve written less than some of my peers, despite my occasional deluges. I think in words all the fucking time, I struggle to keep words out of my head, but the act of putting those exact same words down on a page doesn’t hit me in the way it seems to hit others. Because the creativity isn’t the process, the creativity is some animating force in you, and it comes out through process, and takes shape in process. It eventually becomes a product. And we can revel in process, we can, but that doesn’t mean we’ll be proud of the product. Most importantly, simply saying that we should enjoy the process will not make anyone suddenly start enjoying it.

I don’t really know how to make myself write more; I’ve written short stories and poetry and little essays. None of that has made it easier. And making one-page tabletop games, making little Twine games, forcing yourself to scope small, none of that makes it easier to make games.

So… what the fuck do we do about it?

I have no idea. I’m trying to figure it out. Like the Simpsons joke, I’ve tried nothing and I’m all out of ideas! Truth is, this is a sort of totalizing issue, and I don’t think I’m alone. I think a lot of people probably struggle with motivating themselves towards their creative work. I’m not the first person to ramble about this and I won’t be the last.

As an aside, another issue I will fully admit I have is that I have this thought process that I need to make stuff myself always. I can’t use the mountains of community-made assets and systems that would make all my ideas easier to achieve. That would be “cheating”, that wouldn’t be “real”, it would mean I “wasn’t a game developer”. This is, in a word, silly, and I want to get over it. But this is sort of related because a significant reason I find myself not working is because, when I think about all the stuff I would have to make to even get to the stuff I care about, I grow extremely weary and immediately want to give up before even starting.

One idea I’ve thrown around is a sort of stepping stone approach. Using smaller projects as way of building foundations and iterable systems that I can continue to utilize in future projects. A concern, though, is that this would instrumentalize the project, which runs a risk of sapping motivation once again. (“This isn’t the game I want to be making, I’m just doing it as homework, so why am I making it at all?”) I dunno.

I’m happy for all the artists who enjoy the process alone, even if I often don’t enjoy it. But I’m not there yet, and I don’t know when I will be. I can’t snap my fingers and make it so. I cannot quell my petty ambitions for now. So it makes more sense to find a way to make peace with them, first.


To make this not a blatant vent-post, how do you square your ambitions? How do you think about your goals in relation to what you’re capable of at the moment? How do you tailor your expectations of your work? What processes do you use to manage them?

i think the idea of ‘promises’ as described in the article are useful for tiny games, mostly as a metric of scope - perhaps a better one than counting numbers of levels/assets, because it interrogates the completeness of the idea rather than really caring about content.

and i think for clarity i’d want to define some ‘promises’ as being things like:

  • the player should feel empowered by fast+fluid movement
  • sense of mystery/exploration to the world
  • game emits an atmosphere of XYZ

then when dealing with your own games, actually go over your design goals in your head and list out however many promises you feel like the current design makes. then ask yourself:

  • how many of them are already sufficiently fulfilled with the project in its current state?
  • what are some minimal stakes ways to check off those that are not yet fulfilled?
  • which ones don’t have any sort of clear path to completion?

and i imagine that when dealing with ‘ambition’ you are really trying to reason about what ratio of these categories your project has. i know outside of this blog the author’s expressed some distaste for releasing games as ‘part one’ of some to-be series (usually the result of scoping-down a project) - which i think relates to the idea of promises in that the initial game offers a lot of promises, but cutting it down to an introductory section just ends up deferring the resolution of those promises to some other game which may or may not ever finish, leaving the actual existing product kind of hollow in the end.

this ‘part one’ problem also extends to intentionally small games or jam projects too which can be a huge pitfall - not only for the resulting game but also your own ability as a developer to feel sated by creating them. Often these jam-scoped games have a way of ‘unjustifying’ themselves like: ‘oh i only had a week’, ‘was simply trying out a new tool’, ‘i joined on a whim/out of boredom’. and i think theres value to those as practices but they often end up internally giving you permission to leave all these extra promises on the table when you release that game.

i wanted to write about this in the existing ‘burned out from game jams’ topic but this year i pretty much absolved to not take part in any game jams specifically because of the feeling it elicits to see yet another good idea left on the backburner. and showing those projects to others and saying ‘yeah i’d like to return to it eventually’ - honestly, no i wont! who am i kidding there?! if i wanted to keep working on it i wouldn’t have stopped. now its just another thing that exists in my overall library but doesn’t really contribute anything meaningful to it.

so i think the lesson i’ve learned is that if i give myself any kind of easy out than that’s what i’ll end up taking. and maybe the trick or ‘productivity hack’ here is to find a way to make that ‘easy out’ something that actually fulfills the promises you set out to make fluidly. the hardest part about that is the third category of promises which just seem out of reach, and it seems to me that dealing with those is a lot of the reason games come out with out that completeness to them. its the part of the process where you have to consider either how to down-scope or outsource your problems somehow.

Despite minimal credentials as a game dev, I’ve been doing creative projects my entire life, and as of the past few years have managed to finish some major self-run projects (6 months to a year of work).

First: the “enjoying the process” business? Total sham. 90% of the time I spend on creative projects is in a state of frustration, stuck trying to figure out what to do next. Frustration is not only a universal experience in creative work, it’s also necessary to get better. There are times when working on projects feels enjoyable in the moment, but most of the gratification that comes from creative work is after I’ve completed it. Nothing is sacred without sacrifice, as they say.

One big thing that I didn’t see the blog post touch on is that the ability to stick to and finish a major project requires a set of skills distinct from doing the actual work. Like all skills, these self-management skills have to be built up like muscles. Few people can suddenly will themselves to consistently work on something every day for 3 years, any more than I can will myself to run a marathon tomorrow. You start with a 1-month project, then a 2-month one, then a 6-month one. (Age is also a factor here. It can vary between people, but I believe that on average the ability to stick to large projects improves naturally as we get older.)

This is one argument for starting with small games, and to me more important than one from an aesthetic standpoint. Personally I enjoy small games, but I totally understand if people can’t make themselves satisfied with 5-minute walking simulators.

So, here is a possible solution: to build your way up to ambitious games, try working on large self-driven creative projects that aren’t games. If 3 months isn’t sufficient time to make a game you’ll be happy with, how about 3 months on a solo EP or a novella or an animated short? I don’t have a study in the Journal of Psychology or anything, but I suspect the raw skills of concentration, self-management, and willingness to return to the same old project every day are pretty general, and transferable between different artistic media.


Another aspect of working on large projects is the management and prioritization of tasks. Agile software development methods like Kanban are a good way to get acquainted with the kind of second-order thinking, regardless of whether you follow any particular method to a tee. A few simple agile-inspired suggestions I have for people taking on large projects:

  • Write up a ticket for every little actionable task. Don’t keep any todo item in your head. Even “email Jeff about redesigning the samurai” should be in the tracker. (GitLab and GitHub issue trackers are fine, Trello as well.)
  • Good tickets are small, atomic, have a clear Definition of Done, and are actionable. “Improve the weasel AI” is a lousy ticket, since it doesn’t say how much improvement or how to improve it. “Lower the probability of weasels’ dropkick attacks to 0.1,” then another ticket for “Evaluate weasel dropkick adjustment with playtesters” are much better. There has to be a clear vision of what causes the issue to be closed, allowing you to move on to other stuff.
  • More open-ended creative work can and should be broken down this way. One ticket I have open for my game is “Redesign the login screen puzzle.” To complete this ticket I need to sit down for an hour or so, drum up some ideas, and mock it up in a graphics program. Then a separate ticket is for actually coding that mockup in the game. (The latter ticket should be tagged as “blocked” as it can’t be started until the first ticket is finished.) Even dialogue writing I plan using small discrete tasks. In my experience, such rigorous systems don’t put a damper on creative expression, and actually they tend to induce creativity.
  • Batch together tickets into releases. I privately released v0.2 of my game to playtesters and I have 8 issues tagged as v0.3 for the highest-priority tasks, especially ones that completely blocked or frustrated testers. Periodically I might remove tasks from v0.3 if I feel they aren’t as important as I thought, or add new ones that have come up. Even if you aren’t literally releasing the game to testers or otherwise, discrete releases feel a lot more satisfying than an endless, continuous conveyor belt of tasks.

Admittedly, part of why these systems work for me is that I have a pedantic and rule-oriented personality and having systems to adhere to is just how I roll. (All this is aimed at solo projects. For those who work on team projects, having a well-maintained issue tracker is even more essential.)

i use git issues somewhat frequently on my projects, though only usually the things i’m tracking on github, and moreover mostly the things where i have a lot of code/engineering work to do.
i think the plus is usually when i go to add one that i’ve thought of, i end up coming up with or remembering 2 or 3 other things i should also track. once you get into the habit of coming back to write them you can task out a lot of things, moreso than you’d initially think

So, it’s been a while, but I kind of want to circle back here… I think for me the problems being discussed are totally real and totally pertinent, but are also not exactly what I was referring to here. For me, the core problem here has less to do with project management, but expectation management. The process of making art is complicated, and I have this issue with most forms I dabble in, but it’s the worst with video games (I think? Not sure…) mostly because of the technical hurdles. The struggle with video game development for me has always been very much about what I expect myself to do, rather than what would actually be the best course of action. And because those expectations are both unfair and unburdened, they keep expanding.

So, as much as I want to find ways to needle at the “promises” angle (any advice given by Brandon Sanderson I am prepared to readily reject!), I think framing projects, especially small projects, as games which have clear, defined promises, could be really valuable as a way of orienting the process. We can call them promises, goals, expectations, whatever; the point is giving yourself creative moorings and a sense of direction.

The problem, then, is also figuring out how to create those promises. What promises do we start with? How broad can they be? What expectations are appropriate for this project? When is it appropriate to adjust, add, or remove goals from your list? How do we corral these promises in order to enable ourselves to make the art we want to make?

Again, another rambley post, I should go to sleep.