Vous pouvez ajouter des informations de localisation à vos Tweets, comme votre ville ou votre localisation précise, depuis le Web et via des applications tierces. Vous avez toujours la possibilité de supprimer l'historique de localisation de vos Tweets. En savoir plus
All of this is true and is yet another reason why I find process to be more important than theory in game design. It's more important to build the elements of your game in the right order than to try and 100% predict how those elements will affect the player. https://twitter.com/twoscooters/status/1015157266591485953 …
If the impact of a design idea is easily predicted it's probably because it is a well worn idea and won't feel that significant to the player anyway, and if that's the case you don't need it in the game early in development.
On the other hand, if you have a impactful idea, it's usually a new take on something. You're not going to be able to reliably predict how it will feel to the player. The goal becomes testing the idea in the fastest & cheapest way possible.
You can pick up most of what's useful to know about game design theory in a few years of reading and GDC review. Knowing what to build *next* for your game takes experience and constant study, and is most often done wrong.
This is true at many levels. It's hard to know what features to prioritize for a project as a whole. It's hard to know how much to polish a feature now versus later. It's hard to know how to spend your day.
When I look back on the big projects I've shipped, it's priority decisions that determined the successes and failures. Theory helps you identify blind spots in your ideas, but good process is what illuminates those ideas.
Twitter est peut-être en surcapacité ou rencontre momentanément un incident. Réessayez ou rendez-vous sur la page Twitter Status pour plus d'informations.
