What does a game director(Iga) do in a team?

Interesting question!
It's like two types of band, the former is like someone in the band do all the compose and arrange, others just play the instruments, the latter is like someone in the band compose the music, and band members would do a jam together then fit in their own ideas in different parts to arrange.

Never been in a dev team though, but it kinda depends on the director, like some movie directors allow their actors to do something out of the scripts, others don't and everything should be like what's in his head.

First time posting here, so, sorry if I mess up.



In game development, just who does what is something that ultimately depends on the company.
There are some "guys in charge," normally referred to as the producer and the director. In Japan, the producer is normally the person who is ultimately responsible for the product, but he or she is not involved in the day to day design decisions. The person in charge of that, the one who heads the development team, is the director.

But there are producers who are very hands-on, and directors who are very hands-off. Often there is a head game designer, known as the "main planner", who reports to the director and is in charge of making sure the game is fun. There are often several game designers providing ideas, and programmers and artists obviously voice their opinion, too.

Going by how IGA's described his work with Inti-Creates, I get the feeling he's very hands-on but also very team-oriented: he loves for the team to come up with new ideas and give him their feedback. He's said he loves it when people surprise him by putting their personal touch on the product.



This sort of thing really depends on the situation.

For the battle pose, IGA could give instructions like "give Miriam a cool battle pose", and then the art director will discuss it with the animator and come up with something. Then IGA could look at the battle pose and say "I love it!" or, "maybe it could use some tweaking", etc.

As for the fireball example, it really depends how much IGA wants to delegate to the other designers. He could simply ask for "an easy boss", he could ask for "a boss that shoots fireballs", he could ask for "a boss that shoots five fireballs"... the boss designer then offers a prototype and his own opinions, suggestions, etc.



I think this is probably a better description of how western game development works - the Japanese do things a little differently. Instead of "design document", they use something they call a "kikakusho", which is more visual than detail oriented - you normally do them on Power Point! This document has the main ideas of the game, what the theme is, how it works, the features that make it fun... think of it as an extended comercial for the finished product.

Since the "kikakusho" is meant to make people "get" the game, IGA must have had a early "kikakusho" for Bloodstained to show potential publishers.

Once development begins, there's the "shiyousho" (specifications/features document), which doesn't necessarily exist as one document - it could be several documents, which outline how the different features of the game are meant to behave. But smaller scale games don't necessarily even get this treatment - they'll just write what parameters you should be able to tweak for the game and that's it! The team will talk goals, deadlines, and get to work.

Great post, Dareka! I wonder, though, doesn't the director have input on budget and time management as well? I know IGA was responsible for getting the portable games out under tight budgets and deadlines, so I'm sure he's lending some of that management expertise to Bloodstained as well ;o

I remember Naoki Yoshida was labeled as both the producer and the director. He was incredibly hands on when he took over Final Fantasy XIV, and made a vast amount of key decisions and still does going forward.

Kinky. >:3

Being a leader requires you to be strong. But flexible as well. Much like the Nebula whip.

While the approach to game development is very different in Japan, when you get right down to it it's the personality of the guy in charge that makes the biggest difference, regardless of the overall approach you're following.

The way I see it, you've basically got these leader types (examples taken from Japanese game developers, but the same applies to western developers):

The obsessive: always hands on, goes over everything to make sure it's just the way he/she wants it. Example: Hideo Kojima.
The team player: maybe hands-on or hands-off, but tends to delegate responsibilities and accept the creative input from others. Example: IGA, Yoshi-P(FFXIV)
The whip-cracker: maybe hands-on or hands-off, but the person's style is basically to push the team. Example: Keiji Inafune, Shigeru Miyamoto.

None of these types is good or bad per-se ... they each have their advantages and disadvantages, and all leaders have to be a bit of each - but they do translate into very, very different results.

Here are some advantages and disadvantages that come to mind.

The obsessive

Advantages: can lead to the creation of truly innovative and revolutionary games, as one guy's crazy vision is not diluted by those of others - no one else's opinion matters.
Disadvantages: the whole no one else's opinion matters extends to the players as well, so controversial issues are not addressed. Think of the cut-scenes in Metal Gear: there are those who love them, but they've also been criticized for being too long, which is something Kojima never addressed.

The team player

Advantages: leads to the creation of games enriched by several different perspectives.
Disadvantages: more likely to result in an evolutionary product as opposed to one which is revolutionary. Also, if the team player leader is not a good project manager, the game might never come out, since competing ideas eat up time and resources.

The whip-cracker

Advantages: leads to games that represent the very best a team has to offer...
Disadvantages: ... provided that the team is very good, or that the whip cracker him/herself is very good and very hands-on ... otherwise, demanding that stuff be better isn't going to make it better, and might actually make it worse.

He directs!