Game Design Consultation

After the user answers question 1, and only then, proceed to Step 1b.

Step 1b: Intake — Question 2 of 4

Call AskUserQuestion now. Do not output text. Stop after the tool call and wait.

• header: "Loop Depth"
• question: "Which loop timescales have you designed for so far?"
• options:
  • "30-second only" — moment-to-moment actions only
  • "30-sec + 5-min" — micro and mid-level loops
  • "Full loop defined" — 30-sec, 5-min, and 30-min loops
  • "Not sure" — haven't thought about it in those terms

After the user answers question 2, and only then, proceed to Step 1c.

Step 1c: Intake — Question 3 of 4

Call AskUserQuestion now. Do not output text. Stop after the tool call and wait.

• header: "Problem Area"
• question: "What's your biggest current design problem? Pick the closest category — use notes or Other to describe it."
• options:
  • "Player retention" — players don't return or finish
  • "Combat / feel" — actions don't feel good or fights aren't fun
  • "AI / enemies" — enemy behavior feels off or unfair
  • "Pacing / boredom" — players lose interest or say it's repetitive

After the user answers question 3, and only then, proceed to Step 1d.

Step 1d: Intake — Question 4 of 4

Call AskUserQuestion now. Do not output text. Stop after the tool call and wait.

• header: "Success Feel"
• question: "In an ideal session, what should success feel like for the player?"
• options:
  • "Mastery / skill" — player earned their victory through skill
  • "Discovery / wonder" — player explored and uncovered something
  • "Power / control" — player feels dominant and unstoppable
  • "Story / emotion" — player feels moved or satisfied by the narrative

After the user answers question 4, proceed to Step 2.

Step 2: Domain Check

First, silently decide which domains are relevant based on the intake answers:

• Skip AI / Enemy Behavior for pure narrative or idle games
• Skip Combat Feel for narrative, puzzle, or idle games
• Skip Puzzle Design for pure action or idle games
• Player Incentives applies to most games
• Engagement and Pacing applies to sessions longer than 10 minutes

Then work through the relevant domain probes one at a time. The rule is the same as Step 1: call AskUserQuestion, then stop and wait for the answer before calling it again.

Domain probe questions (call one, stop, wait, then call the next):

AI / Enemy Behavior (skip if no non-player opponents)

• header: "AI Telegraph", question: "Can players read what enemies are about to do before it happens?", options: "Clearly telegraphed" — attacks always have readable pre-signals | "Somewhat" — some attacks are telegraphed, others feel sudden | "Mostly hidden" — attacks often feel sudden or unavoidable

• header: "Enemy Feel", question: "Do enemies feel alive and purposeful, or scripted and mechanical?", options: "Dynamic & alive" — players develop strategies around enemies | "Mixed" — some feel purposeful, others scripted | "Scripted & mechanical" — players just react, no real strategy

Combat Feel (skip if no direct conflict mechanics)

• header: "Impact Feel", question: "Does hitting or being hit feel satisfying and impactful?", options: "Satisfying & clear" — hits feel weighty with strong feedback | "Somewhat" — some feedback, but could be stronger | "Numbers going down" — no real sense of impact

• header: "Death Feel", question: "When players die or lose a fight, does it feel fair or cheap?", options: "Fair — my mistake" — players accept deaths as their own errors | "Mixed" — sometimes fair, sometimes feels cheap | "Cheap & unavoidable" — players frequently blame the game

• header: "Defense Mix", question: "Are there meaningful defensive options, or is attacking always optimal?", options: "Multiple viable options" — block, dodge, parry, counter all work | "One dominant option" — players always use the same defense | "No real defense" — best strategy is to attack first every time

Player Incentives (relevant for most games)

• header: "Fun vs Efficient", question: "Are players doing the most fun thing, or the most efficient thing?", options: "Same thing" — fun and efficient paths align | "Somewhat aligned" — some divergence but not breaking the game | "Efficiency wins" — players sacrifice fun to optimize

• header: "Reward Signal", question: "When players do something well, does the game reward them immediately and clearly?", options: "Immediate & clear" — players know exactly what earns rewards | "Somewhat" — rewards exist but timing or reason isn't always obvious | "Opaque or delayed" — players aren't sure what earns rewards or when

• header: "Exploit Risk", question: "Is there a degenerate strategy players gravitate toward that bypasses the intended experience?", options: "None found" — no strategy clearly bypasses the intended loop | "Minor shortcuts" — workarounds exist but aren't dominant | "Major exploit" — one strategy breaks the intended game

Engagement and Pacing (skip for sessions under 10 minutes)

• header: "Return Hook", question: "Why do players come back after putting the game down?", options: "Strong pull" — players always know what draws them back | "Moderate hook" — some forward momentum but could be stronger | "Unclear" — players may not know why they'd return

• header: "Freshness", question: "Does the game stay fresh after the first hour, or start to feel repetitive?", options: "Stays fresh" — new mechanics or content sustain interest | "Some repetition" — starts strong, shows repetition over time | "Gets stale quickly" — feels the same after the first session

• header: "Aha Moment", question: "Is there a moment where players 'get it' and feel competent? When does it happen?", options: "Early (< 5 min)" — players feel competent very quickly | "Mid (5–30 min)" — takes some time to click | "Late or never" — many players never reach that feeling

Puzzle Design (skip if no logic, exploration, or discovery mechanics)

• header: "Solve Feel", question: "When players solve a puzzle, do they feel smart or lucky?", options: "Feel smart" — players solve through insight and feel clever | "Mixed" — sometimes insight, sometimes trial-and-error | "Lucky / brute-force" — players often solve without understanding why

• header: "Stuck State", question: "When players get stuck, do they have a way forward or hit a wall?", options: "Always a way forward" — hints or logical next steps are available | "Sometimes stuck" — players occasionally hit a wall | "Often walls" — players frequently have no way to progress

• header: "Misdirection", question: "Do players ever feel tricked or misled by your puzzle design?", options: "Never tricked" — puzzles are honest about what they test | "Occasionally" — some misdirection used intentionally as a mechanic | "Often misled" — players frequently feel deceived

After all relevant probes are answered, proceed to Step 3.

Step 3: Diagnosis

Based on everything the developer has shared, identify the top 3–5 design problems. For each problem:

1. Name it clearly — give the problem a specific name, not a vague category
2. Map it to a principle — identify which design principle it violates and quote that principle
3. Explain why it's a problem — describe the player-facing consequence, not just the design failure
4. Identify the root cause — distinguish between a symptom (players complain about X) and the underlying cause (because the system does Y)

Design principles to draw from:

AI & Enemies:

• Enemies must telegraph their intentions — if the player can't read the decision, the AI might as well not have made it
• AI intensity must match the core fantasy — a power-fantasy game with oppressively smart enemies undermines the experience
• Consistent behaviors beat unpredictable ones — players need to form mental models to feel clever, not lucky
• Player-favoring biases (grace periods, attacker limits) are essential, not cheating

Combat:

• Combat is a conversation — both sides need a readable vocabulary of moves for fights to feel fair and dynamic
• Hit stop and impact feedback are not polish — they are the primary signal that an action mattered
• Every attack needs startup, active, and recovery frames — no startup means no opportunity to react
• Defensive options must all be viable — if one is clearly dominant, the others don't exist

Player Incentives:

• The optimal strategy and the intended strategy must be the same — if they diverge, the game is broken
• Rewards must be immediate and legible — delayed or opaque rewards fail to reinforce the behavior
• Push-forward design: killing things should give you resources to kill more things, not drain them
• The game should softly discourage degenerate strategies through design, not through hard blocks

Engagement & Pacing:

• Every game needs three loop timescales: 30-second (moment-to-moment), 5-minute (tactical), 30-minute (strategic)
• Novelty must be sustained — players front-load their assessment of a game; the first hour sets expectations the rest must exceed
• Return motivation must be explicit — players should always know what they will do when they come back
• Flow state requires dynamic difficulty — a fixed difficulty curve cannot match a player's growing skill

Puzzle Design:

• Players must feel smart, not lucky or tricked — the puzzle should surface the observation before demanding the solution
• Minimalism is a virtue — every added element is another thing the player must rule out
• Failure needs explanation — silent failure teaches nothing and frustrates rather than challenges

Step 4: Recommendations

For each diagnosed problem, give a concrete recommendation. Structure each one as:

Problem: [Name] Recommendation: [Specific, actionable change — not "improve the AI" but "add a 0.5-second windup animation to all enemy attacks before the hitbox activates"] Example: [Reference a real game that solved this well, if applicable]

Close the consultation with:

For deep implementation help on [the relevant domain(s)], use the relevant bundled skill — no additional install needed:

• /ai-design — detailed AI behavior rubric and implementation patterns
• /combat-design — combat feel, animation phases, hit stop, and defensive mechanics
• /player-protection-design — player incentives, reward timing, and push-forward design
• /ethical-engagement-design — pacing, novelty curves, session loops, and dark pattern avoidance
• /game-design-problem-solving — root cause analysis and playtesting methodology
• /puzzle-design — catch/revelation structure, hint systems, and difficulty curves

Only surface skills that are relevant to the actual findings from this consultation.