Art by Meriellie Raad
So.
You may have heard people talk about the concept of top down design vs. bottom up design, but what are we referring to when we talk about these concepts? And no, I'm not talking about running around shirtless or pointing your rump skyward (silly goose)
The phrases "top down" and "bottom up" design refer to the concept of building a game with a focus on its core theme or with a focus on its core mechanics respectively.
Another way to phrase it would be "Form over Function" or "Function over Form"
Both of these have their merits. It mostly comes down to the preference of the designer and their goal when it comes to the creation of their game.
For many, it is easier to come up with a scenario that must then be filled out with mechanics that turn it into a board game. This is top down design. Designers who are good at this have a knack for creating tie in games for existing franchises that specifically and naturally express the core elements of the IP they are representing. When approaching the design for a title, they will often start with the question of "who, what, why, and where" as a storyteller would.
Who are the characters that our players are playing as? What are the characters trying to do? Why are they trying to do it? Where is this all happening?
These questions mold and inform the mechanics they create. Are the characters trying to get somewhere before each other? Then it becomes a race track board game. Are the players sneaking around a bank, trying to steal stuff? Then perhaps push your luck mechanics are more applicable. Are the players going on a wild adventure with many twists an turns? Then you might need an event deck to randomize and present those wild twists.
With top down design it's about designing a "form" and filling it out with mechanical "functions"
This contrasts with bottom up design which starts with a mechanical identity and builds a an aesthetic (or in my circles, narvisaud) identity around those mechanics.This kind of designer has a knack for creating games that are pure engagement, with little to no need for creative context. Bottom up designers ask the question of "why, what, how, and when" as an engineer would.
Why are players playing my game? What feelings do I want them to feel? How can I make them feel these? What are they doing that conjures these feelings? How long do I think they'll play this for?
These questions mold and inform the feel they want to create, as well as the core theming if they layer on top of it if they so choose. Do we want players to trying and guess what the other is doing? Consider adding hidden information mechanics with minor tells here and there. Do we want the players to feel like a team? Consider adding mechanics that encourage players to support each other. Do we want the game to vary between plays? Consider adding randomization mechanics, based around a grab bag
, deck of cards, or dice.
Should the bottom up designer want to, they can add a form layer on top of the mechanics, that accentuates and sells the feeling that they're going for. This said, they could also hand the raw design off to a publisher and let them figure out what it's all supposed to represent!
In either case, bottom up design is about designing a mechanical "function(s)" and layering an aesthetic form on top of it.
I myself am more of a top-down designer than a bottom-up one, as I tend to think more in stories than in implementations
And what of you good reader? Do you favor form, function, or some nebulous space in between?
Comments