Last week, I wrote about finding your game’s atom — that is, the smallest possible element of your game, the mechanic that actually defines your game.
This week, I want to talk about molecules.
Some games only have one atom. Tetris is a great example of a mono-mechanical game. What’s the atom? Rotate and move the block. That’s all there is to it. Not that there isn’t strategy and depth here, but the core mechanic is pure and simple.
Pong might be an even better example. None of that fancy rotating or sliding here: just move your paddle up and down to hit the ball. Hours of entertainment! Hours!
And on the tabletop side, you’ve got checkers (move your piece diagonally) and tic-tac-toe.
These are good games (well, except for tic-tac-toe), but most players want something a little more complex and interesting. They don’t want just an atom. They want a whole molecule.
Adding Atoms
Molecules, as I vaguely remember from eighth-grade science, are made up of atoms. More to the point (and relevant to my increasingly-stretched metaphor), a molecule is a group of atoms combined in a specific way to create a new substance.
So you’ve got your core atom of gameplay. But there are other other gameplay elements too. They may not be core, but they’re still important. They’re still atoms. And by combining them with your core atom, you can create a new molecule of gameplay.
For example, look at an action shooter game. The core mechanics (move and shoot) are pretty well established. But if you add another atom of gameplay, you can create a whole new molecule. Add a cover system, and you’ve got Gears of War. Add crazy jumping, you get Mirror’s Edge. (Add jetpacks, and you get an extra 30% on your Metacritic score.)
Or to drag out my dog-eared example from last week, Magic: the Gathering, the mana system is a secondary mechanic that combines beautifully with the core “hit you with my creature” mechanic to form the beating, cardboard heart that drives the game.
“That’s a lovely metaphor,” you say, while taking a money bath with Mark Zuckerberg at GDC. “But what’s it trying to say about how we make games?”
Ah yes, the point of all this.
Games are made up of many different gameplay elements. As designers, it’s our job to identify each of them, decide which are most important, and develop them in that order. We should refine the core element first, then craft each subsequent element to compliment what has come before.
It’s much easier to iterate on a piece of gameplay if you’re confident that it’s built on a solid foundation: there are far fewer variables to worry about. (I don’t know about you, but I spend too many sleepless nights worrying about variables as it is.)
Multiplying Molecules
“So my game,” you say, picking Zynga cash out of your hair, “is just one big molecule? Can I combine molecules into something even bigger?”
Sure! If you’re Sid Meier making Civlization or Kevin Wilson making Arkham Horror, you’ve got so many game systems going on at once, it would be silly and useless to think of them as a single molecule. But the same principles apply: find your core molecule (hint: it’s the one that includes your core atom), polish it until it glows, and make sure each subsequent molecule works with what’s already there and glowing.
In the end, you’ve got a game that might not be as pure as Pong, but it’s probably more fun.
