We build prototypes to break things first.
This is our sandbox. A place for raw mechanics, sensory experiments, and systems that haven't been polished for mass consumption. Every interactive element below is a snapshot of a working idea—unfiltered, unfinished, and deliberately unpolished.
Explore the friction, the failed iterations, and the invisible architecture that makes games feel alive.
MECH: 'VORTEX PULL' / ITERATION 12
Developer's Notes
// This prototype isolates a single mechanic: gravitational pull on collectible nodes. The "ugly" state lets us test feel before committing visual resources. The audio layer (still missing) is mocked with a simple sine wave to test rhythmic timing.
Raw Mechanics
Over Polished Art.
We believe in building the core loop first. The sketch below shows our initial paper test for a platformer's jump arc—marked with failed angles and friction values. The digital version is a direct translation, not a reimagining.
SKETCH: PAPER & BALLPOINT
DIGITAL: BUILD 0.4.1
Failed Interaction Models
- ✕ Touch Slingshot: Scrubbing gesture to aim. Reason: Too abstract; no tactile feedback on release.
- ✕ Gyroscope Balancing: Tilt to align lasers. Reason: Unplayable on shaky public transit.
- ✕ Haptic Puzzle: Blind vibration patterns for a lock. Reason: Violates accessibility standards for the hearing impaired.
Engineering
Visceral Feedback.
We treat sound and vibration as core mechanics, not just decoration. Every "click," "thud," or "chime" is calibrated to trigger a specific psychological response. Here's a breakdown of a single sword clash effect.
Audio Layer Analysis: "Clash"
LAYER 1: TRANSIENT (The Impact)
LAYER 2: BODY (The Resonance)
LAYER 3: METAL (The After-Tone)
Micro-Scenario: First 10 Seconds
- 0.00s Haptic "Wake" (Light Buzz) - Anticipation
- 0.30s UI "Click" (High Freq) - Control Confirmed
- 1.50s Ambient "Warp" (Low Rumble) - World Loaded
- 3.00s First Action "Snap" - Reward Immediate
The Invisible
Rules of Engagement.
Games are systems of constraints and rewards. We map them like cartographers, identifying choice points, friction zones, and the psychological triggers that keep players invested for 100 hours or 10 minutes.
Analyst's Note
The most elegant system is invisible. Players should feel agency, not mechanics. This board is our proof of that axiom.
Player Journey Flowchart
Marks: Red lines = User Decision Points. Gray lines = Forced Pacing.
Reward System Trade-offs
+ Predictable. - Respects Player Time. Verdict: Hostile to casuals.
+ Pure Merit. - High Skill Ceiling. Verdict: Core loop for hardcore.
+ Sticky. - Demands Coordination. Verdict: Used for guilds/teams.
Pitfall Post-Its
↑ LATE-GAME STALL
Progression decoupled from skill. Players hit a numeric wall.
↑ FALSE CHOICES
Options that don't change meaningful outcomes. Eradicates agency.
↑ ONBOARDING DRIFT
Tutorial lasts 15 minutes. By the end, player has forgotten controls.
↑ INVENTORY ANXIETY
Too many slots, unclear value. Leads to decision paralysis.
Monetization Pressure Analysis
Visual abstraction of weekly ad presentation frequency. Red bars indicate "Buy Now" prompts, kept below 5% of sessions.
Case Study: The 10-Minute Commuter
We designed a "Session Stamina" system that caps resource gathering after 12 minutes. This protects the commute slot, ensuring meaningful progress without requiring a lunch break.
Constraints: The Lab's Boundaries
Assumptions
- • Hardware capability is a moving target (e.g., A-series chips).
- • Player attention is fragmented; sessions are < 20m.
- • Fair monetization = transparent, not free.
Boundaries
- • No purchases over $4.99 in a single transaction.
- • No dark patterns (fake countdown timers).
- • Local storage only for user data; no cloud sync by default.
What Changes This?
A major iOS/Android update that breaks our core interaction model, or new evidence of a viable, ethical alternative to our current monetization strategy. We test monthly.
Robustness Evaluation Method
The 12-Minute Stress Test: Every prototype must be playable and "fun" within 12 minutes on a mid-range device from 3 years ago. If it fails, we strip it down, not optimize up.
The "Grandma" Test: Can a non-gamer (55+) understand the core loop without reading instructions? We record their sessions, analyzing for confusion points, not success.
The Dry-Week Playtest: We ship a build with zero IAP prompts for a week. If retention plummets, the core loop is weak. If it holds, monetization can be added ethically.
Key Terms We Live By
Questions Investors Should Ask
- 1. What's the failure rate of your prototypes?
- High. We archive 70% of concepts. A failing test is a successful experiment.
- 2. How do you balance Polish design vs. raw mechanics?
- We never polish before the loop is fun. It's a sequential process, not parallel.
- 3. What's your response to negative player feedback on a live feature?
- We check telemetry first. If data contradicts sentiment, we study the gap. If data agrees, we revert or redesign.
- 4. How do you handle hardware fragmentation?
- We design for the oldest viable device, then enhance. Feature flag all. No broken experiences.
- 5. What's your stance on "crunch" for launch deadlines?
- We don't believe in it. If we're crunching, our scoping failed. We ship what's ready.
See Our Work in Action
Visit our portfolio to see how these experimental principles are applied in shipped titles.
Explore the Portfolio →