Today's topic is the most engineering forward of the principles of design. In many ways two aspects in one principle, scale and proportion is all about looking at how size affects design.
Scale is the actual sizing of an element. Scale is most obvious in games with minis, where the scales are usually listed (especially if the minis are bought separately). Scale is hugely important in board games, a hobby enjoyed by the very young to the very old with vastly different levels of vision and dexterity. Board games are physical objects that are manipulated by human players and present changing information sets to players throughout game based on that manipulation. Human scale is when elements are designed to be used by the average human (as opposed to mice or elephants, I suppose). Some games have employed an unusual scale (or exaggerated scale) to drive excitement about a game. Giant Jenga is arguably outside of human scale, especially for humans whose height trends below average. Giant Jenga is also clearly cooler, because everyone knows that the possibility of a concussion is what Jenga had always been missing.
Scale can also be deployed to create a sense of space. Do you want players to feel small in a vast universe or tightly constrained with little room to maneuver? The scales you deploy can reinforce the theme or desired player experience.
Proportion is the relative size of one component compared to another. Proportion can be used to create emphasis by using the size of an element/part of an element to drawer the viewers' attention. Notably, proportion can vary within a given scale. Mess with proportion too much and you enter into surrealism, which is a confusion of scale. Surrealism must be intentional and well executed or your players will simply feel confused. Confusion is only good if it adds to immersion and doesn't detract from gameplay. Similarly, fantasy in scaling moves completely beyond reality. Fantasy in this sense is not the same as fantasy commonly seen in movies and literature, which often still broadly relies on human scale to create the world.
Hierarchic Scaling is the use of more than one scale to convey which elements are the most important. This is another way to clearly deploy emphasis, with the clear intention to convey that the larger element is the more valuable/important/essential. Ancient Egyptians were famous for deploying hierarchic scaling in their art. To our eyes, hierarchic scaling in art looks odd, but makes complete sense in graphic design.
Returning for a moment to human scale, we need to talk about context. Context is the surrounding condition(s) were we find (or can expect to find) a design. Context includes location, which for our purposes is where a game is played. Tabletop games have the expectation of being able to be played on an average sized dining table. Unlike board game storage, where kallax reigns supreme, there is no general expectation that the majority of hobbyists will have the same sizes of gaming table. However, there are some general guidelines designers can follow. The most important issue is that every player should always be able to understand the game state regardless of where they are sitting relative to board orientation. A tiny, unreadable board that is four feet away from a player is bad design. I would say that the individual player space should be no more than two square feet, to allow all of the players and the general use space to fit at the table. The number of players is going to be limited by the number of people the table can accommodate. A typical card table is 3'x3', which is fine for parlor games where players hold most of their cards and there is no large central board. We no longer have an expectation that people will play cards at a card table, which opens design up to be more expansive. Lastly, components should be neither too tiny nor too large to be easily manipulated or deciphered by the average player.
In this series, I'm outlining the principles of design from a perspective of how they relate to board game design. If you want to read more on your own, the main reference I use is Design Basics by David A. Lauer and Stephen Pentak. Available here.
Scale is the actual sizing of an element. Scale is most obvious in games with minis, where the scales are usually listed (especially if the minis are bought separately). Scale is hugely important in board games, a hobby enjoyed by the very young to the very old with vastly different levels of vision and dexterity. Board games are physical objects that are manipulated by human players and present changing information sets to players throughout game based on that manipulation. Human scale is when elements are designed to be used by the average human (as opposed to mice or elephants, I suppose). Some games have employed an unusual scale (or exaggerated scale) to drive excitement about a game. Giant Jenga is arguably outside of human scale, especially for humans whose height trends below average. Giant Jenga is also clearly cooler, because everyone knows that the possibility of a concussion is what Jenga had always been missing.
Scale can also be deployed to create a sense of space. Do you want players to feel small in a vast universe or tightly constrained with little room to maneuver? The scales you deploy can reinforce the theme or desired player experience.
Proportion is the relative size of one component compared to another. Proportion can be used to create emphasis by using the size of an element/part of an element to drawer the viewers' attention. Notably, proportion can vary within a given scale. Mess with proportion too much and you enter into surrealism, which is a confusion of scale. Surrealism must be intentional and well executed or your players will simply feel confused. Confusion is only good if it adds to immersion and doesn't detract from gameplay. Similarly, fantasy in scaling moves completely beyond reality. Fantasy in this sense is not the same as fantasy commonly seen in movies and literature, which often still broadly relies on human scale to create the world.
Hierarchic Scaling is the use of more than one scale to convey which elements are the most important. This is another way to clearly deploy emphasis, with the clear intention to convey that the larger element is the more valuable/important/essential. Ancient Egyptians were famous for deploying hierarchic scaling in their art. To our eyes, hierarchic scaling in art looks odd, but makes complete sense in graphic design.
Returning for a moment to human scale, we need to talk about context. Context is the surrounding condition(s) were we find (or can expect to find) a design. Context includes location, which for our purposes is where a game is played. Tabletop games have the expectation of being able to be played on an average sized dining table. Unlike board game storage, where kallax reigns supreme, there is no general expectation that the majority of hobbyists will have the same sizes of gaming table. However, there are some general guidelines designers can follow. The most important issue is that every player should always be able to understand the game state regardless of where they are sitting relative to board orientation. A tiny, unreadable board that is four feet away from a player is bad design. I would say that the individual player space should be no more than two square feet, to allow all of the players and the general use space to fit at the table. The number of players is going to be limited by the number of people the table can accommodate. A typical card table is 3'x3', which is fine for parlor games where players hold most of their cards and there is no large central board. We no longer have an expectation that people will play cards at a card table, which opens design up to be more expansive. Lastly, components should be neither too tiny nor too large to be easily manipulated or deciphered by the average player.
In this series, I'm outlining the principles of design from a perspective of how they relate to board game design. If you want to read more on your own, the main reference I use is Design Basics by David A. Lauer and Stephen Pentak. Available here.
No comments:
Post a Comment