DEV Community: Ishan Manjrekar

Effective collaboration in game development hinges on shared vision and clear communication across all roles. Recognizing each team member's motivations and tailoring your approach is key to success. ✨Check out some of my thoughts about this here:

Ishan Manjrekar — Thu, 19 Feb 2026 14:50:41 +0000

Is Game Design A One-Person Show?

Ishan Manjrekar ・ Feb 19

#gamedesign #gamedev #indiegames #productmanagement

Are you stuck in the weeds of mechanics or lost in the clouds of 'player experience'? Learn how to bridge the gap using my Design Tiers framework.

Ishan Manjrekar — Wed, 04 Feb 2026 22:54:57 +0000

Ishan Manjrekar

Feb 4

What Tier Are You Designing At?

#discuss #gamedev #gamedesign #creativity

Comments

6 min read

How Player Habits Shape Games Today

Ishan Manjrekar — Wed, 10 Sep 2025 06:00:40 +0000

Welcome to Game Design Bites - a personal take on game design, straight from years of experience in the industry!

If this interests you, subscribe to get game design insights straight to your inbox for free!

Subscribe now

Photo by Jaehyun Kim on Unsplash

I’ve been making games for about 15 years, mostly in free-to-play mobile. Recently, I read about a trending game called Peak (which I haven’t played yet), and it sparked a conversation with friends. That chat made me reflect on the state of the industry, why certain kinds of games are breaking out, how audience expectations shift, and what feels different about hits today.

These are my musings, not a full analysis, but a way to make sense of the patterns I’ve seen.

📱 The Early Days

Mobile arrived much later than consoles and PCs. Back then, internet speeds and hardware were limited. Most games were single-player, with multiplayer existing only in small niches or basic modes.

What mobile offered was accessibility. Always in your pocket. Quick to pick up. A perfect fit for short bursts of play. But because devices could not handle the fidelity of console or PC games, designers leaned on other ways to create stickiness: leaderboards, clans, and light PvP.

These features made mobile feel social in a way that single-player console or PC titles did not at the time. Players could connect with others without committing to long sessions. This created a split: if you wanted long, immersive play, you turned to console or PC. If you wanted short, social bursts, you picked up your phone.

This transition was visible in the rise of early mobile hits. Social Facebook games gave way to mobile titles like Clash of Clans, Words With Friends, and Game of War. All of them built engagement around quick sessions tied to social loops.

⏩ As Platforms Evolved

Technology caught up. Better devices and faster networks opened the door for more complex mobile games. Multiplayer was no longer a technical hurdle. Mobile games layered in richer features and higher fidelity.

Meanwhile, something big happened on consoles and PCs. Fortnite and Roblox did not just entertain. They introduced a whole generation of young players to the idea that games are communities. Playing together, creating together, and being in the same virtual space became the default experience.

Mobile evolved in a different direction. To maximize engagement and monetization, games leaned heavily into single-player progression systems. Puzzle games and RPGs offered long, structured tracks that kept players engaged even if they were not playing with others. It was a way to extract value from highly committed players while still layering optional multiplayer where it made sense.

So while console and PC shifted toward community play, mobile found ways to extend and monetize solo experiences.

If Game Design Bites helps you, here’s a simple way to show some love on Ko-fi.

Support the Newsletter

🦠 The Pandemic Bump

Then came the pandemic. People were stuck inside, with more time on their hands and a stronger desire to feel connected. Console and PC titles became social spaces, virtual playgrounds where friends could hang out. Among Us went viral precisely because it delivered that feeling in the simplest possible way.

At the same time, the Roblox generation was maturing. Kids who started by building worlds in Roblox moved on to Fortnite. Players who spent their early years learning that gaming means community now carried those expectations into everything they played.

For older players like me, console and PC were traditionally solo spaces. For younger players, those platforms were where you met people. That generational divide changed how games were received, and what felt normal in terms of design.

⚔️ The Attention Contest

Meanwhile, mobile was facing a different kind of threat. The rise of TikTok and short-form content rewired how people used their phones. Suddenly, mobile games were not just competing with other games. They were competing with the entire attention economy.

This did not necessarily push games toward deeper design. Instead, it pushed them toward variety. Players might not want to sink into one game for hours on mobile, but they were happy to jump back in for “just one more run” or “just one more puzzle” if the hook was strong enough.

I shared earlier why this shift is reshaping how mobile games are designed. You can read more of those thoughts here.:

So while console and PC needed to double down on social depth, mobile needed to double down on session hooks. The goal was to pull players back before they swiped over to their next piece of content.

🎯 The Impact

The result is a split in the hit formula.

Mobile games : They need to serve two extremes, snackable sessions for casual engagement and deeper single-player loops for long-term monetization. They are fighting TikTok as much as other games, so repeatability and variety matter.
Console and PC games : They are expected to be inherently social. A generation raised on Fortnite and Roblox expects community, cooperation, and play-as-a-hangout as the baseline.
Players themselves : Younger audiences bring social-first expectations to every platform. Older audiences still lean toward variety and progression on mobile.
Design challenge : Mobile is about competing for fragmented attention. Console and PC are about deepening community play.

📜 TL;DR

Early mobile = snacky, light social loops. Console/PC = mostly single-player.
Better tech expanded both: mobile added fidelity plus solo progression, while console/PC went social through Fortnite and Roblox.
Pandemic along with new breakout hits like Among Us cemented the playground model for younger players.
Mobile faces a new rival in TikTok. Mobile games need to fight for attention with variety and hooks.
Today’s hit formula: mobile = single-player depth plus quick repeatable hooks, console/PC = community-driven social play.

These are just my observations of the high-level patterns, not hard rules. A great mechanic can succeed anywhere. The key is understanding how player expectations shift with platform, age, and context. That lens helps you read current trends and spot the right approach to creating something new.

What do you think? Does this feel relatable or make sense to you? Drop your thoughts in the comments, or reach out if you have any other questions or ideas you’d like to share.

Thanks for reading Game Design Bites! Subscribe for FREE to receive new posts and support my work.

What Tier Are You Designing At?

Ishan Manjrekar — Tue, 20 May 2025 06:30:32 +0000

Photo by Kanhaiya Sharma on Unsplash

As you gain experience as a designer, the nature of your responsibilities evolves. When you're starting out, things might seem more straightforward, but "Design" as a concept is inherently vague. This makes career progression in design feel even more ambiguous.

Given that vagueness is a defining feature of this role, I've tried to distill it into a tiered framework.

I've shared my thoughts before on what "good design" is and how to achieve it effectively. If you're interested, you can check out these posts for a recap.

As you advance in your career, I believe you grow by identifying the tasks you're capable of handling at each stage. This list isn’t a strict measure of seniority, but rather a tool to help you gauge your readiness based on the responsibility you’re prepared to take on.

That said, this is just my perspective. The way one approaches design is personal, and the role itself is so open-ended that there’s no one "correct" way to do it. So, take this framework with a grain of salt, and feel free to completely disregard it if it doesn’t resonate with you.

🛠️D tier

The Order Follower

“I follow clear instructions and get the job done.”

At this level, you're looking at a complete beginner. No need to know the tools, the jargon, or the processes in depth. As a D-tier designer, your job is simple: follow instructions.

You’ll be told exactly what to do — whether it’s updating a document, entering data into a tool, or supporting tasks across different parts of the project. These might seem like low-level jobs, but they’re a goldmine for learning. You see how things actually work. You start understanding the moving parts of a team.

The more willing and proactive you are, the more you’ll grow. Not just in skills, but in becoming a reliable team player who’s ready to move up.

⚖️C tier

The Self-Starter

“I know the task — how do I move forward with it? ”

This is the next step up. You’re still focused on execution, but now you’ve got a bit more room to move.

At the C tier, you are allowed figure out some of the how. You don’t need to be spoon-fed every step. You can plan your next moves, ask the right questions, and follow through with minimal hand-holding.

It’s also where you start showing real awareness. You spot ways to improve things—maybe a clearer process, a better document, or a smoother workflow. You’re not making the big calls yet, but your small decisions matter. They help the team run better, and they set you up for the next level.

🛡️B tier

The Executor

“The solution is clear — how do I bring it to life? ”

This is where real ownership begins. At the B tier, the solution is already chosen, but how it comes to life is up to you.

You're responsible for execution. You decide the details, the flow, the experience. You’re trusted to make calls on how the feature should be built, even if you didn’t choose what to build.

Let’s say the team’s decided to add a login calendar to the game. As a B-tier designer, your job is to shape it:

Where does it show up?

How does it work?

What rewards does it offer?

Who sees it, and how often?

You may not have picked the feature itself, but your decisions shape how players experience it. And if you can justify your approach, deliver results, and take up more responsibility for the outcomes, you’re on track to level up.

🔥A tier

The Problem Solver

“I have the problem — now I need to find the right solution. ”

At this level, the tasks get fuzzier, but your ownership gets sharper. You’re not just handed a solution to build. You’re handed a problem, and it’s your job to figure out how to solve it.

The problem could come from anywhere — product, design, tech. It might be:

How do we increase monetization for a specific player cohort?
How do we get more players to return each day?
How do we reduce the game’s download size without hurting the experience?

As an A-tier designer, you're expected to understand the product deeply and craft solutions that make sense. But that’s only half the job. The other half is bringing your team along with you.

Ownership here means alignment. You need to justify your thinking, get buy-in from stakeholders, and keep the team focused, even as people rotate in and out of the project. Sometimes your solution is a small fix. Other times, it’s a long-running initiative with multiple moving parts.

Either way, you're the glue. You provide clarity, direction, and momentum. You’re not just solving problems, you’re leading others through the solution.

🌟S tier

The Visionary

“ Which problem is worth solving? ”

This is the final form of a designer. At the S tier, you're no longer waiting for problems to land on your desk, you’re deciding which problems are worth solving.

Every product has countless challenges. You can't solve them all. The real skill at this level is choosing the right problems to tackle. And often, there’s no obvious answer.

That’s what sets an S-tier designer apart: the ability to define meaningful, high-impact problems based on a deep understanding of the product, the team, and the player. You’re not just reacting, you’re steering.

In a space this uncertain, your decisions won’t always be “right.” And that’s okay. What matters most is that you make decisions. Inaction is worse than a wrong call, because at least with a wrong one, you learn and adapt.

Everything you’ve built up in earlier tiers, the craft, the execution, the collaboration, comes together here. That foundation gives you the confidence to operate in ambiguity and drive the product forward, one smartly chosen problem at a time.

🌈A Spectrum

I’ve broken things down into tiers based on tasks and responsibilities, but in practice, it’s rarely this clean. Real teams, real products, and real timelines often blur these lines.

Personally, I’ve found myself working across the whole spectrum. Sometimes I have to do some D-tier duties. Other times, I’m shaping A-tier solutions. And occasionally, I’m making S-tier decisions today that hand off a trail of work for future me to follow through.

So, this isn’t a rigid hierarchy. It’s not about putting yourself or others into fixed boxes. And it’s definitely not a ranking of seniority.

For me, this framework is just a way to understand the goal of a task—what’s expected, how much ownership is needed, and how to approach or delegate it accordingly.

📜TL,DR

Design responsibilities evolve as you gain experience — from task execution to problem definition.
This tiered model isn’t about seniority; it’s about the level of ownership you take on.
D-tier : You follow clear instructions. Great for learning the ropes and observing how teams work.
C-tier : You’re told what to do, but decide how to do it. Shows initiative and improves processes.
B-tier : You’re given a solution and own the execution. You shape the details and user experience.
A-tier : You’re handed a problem. You craft the solution, align the team, and drive it forward.
S-tier : You identify the problems worth solving. Your decisions guide the product’s direction.
You’ll often operate across tiers depending on the task — that’s normal and expected.
Use this model as a way to clarify your current role, delegate effectively, or plan your growth.

I’m looking at this through a game designer’s lens, but I think it applies to many creative and problem-solving roles involved in making any product. What do you think about this approach to evolving your skills?

Agree, disagree, or have other thoughts? Drop them in the comments below. And if you have questions about my profession, feel free to ask.

If you like reading such posts, do subscribe for FREE to receive new posts and support my work.

economy design, but make it brainrot

Ishan Manjrekar — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 05:31:01 +0000

Welcome to Game Design Bites - a personal take on game design, straight from years of experience in the industry!

If this interests you, subscribe to get game design insights straight to your inbox for free!

Subscribe now

The brainrot-ification of everything is in progress. As I started looking at the mobile game market with this lens, I’ve had a bunch of thoughts.

I posted some opinions on this earlier; you can read them here if you haven't already.

💸Economy Design?

It might sound complex, but at its core, economy design is about managing how resources—like currency, items, and progression—are earned, spent, and balanced in a game.

The term can be broad, covering everything from basic progression systems to intricate economies with multiple currencies.

For this post, I’ll focus on key aspects of economy design in modern games, specifically within mobile gaming. This keeps things structured and aligns with my experience in the field.

✨The Basics

Some key aspects of a game economy can be broken down into a few main components.

🪙Currencies

Most games have at least one, often multiple, currencies that players work toward. These include coins, gems, diamonds, keys, and more.

Soft Currency: Earned easily through gameplay.
Hard Currency: Scarce and possibly requires real-money purchases.

Some games feature multiple soft and hard currencies, and the difficulty of obtaining hard currencies can vary depending on the game’s design.

🛁Source and Sinks

Every currency needs a source , where players earn it, and a sink , where they spend it.

The balance between sources and sinks determines the currency’s value. If too much is earned without enough ways to spend it, its value drops. If it is too scarce, progression can feel slow or frustrating. This follows the basic principles of supply and demand, similar to real-world economies.

📈Progression

Games create a sense of progress, and the economy scales alongside it. As players advance, the economy would evolve to ensure their efforts feel meaningful. A well-designed economy reinforces a sense of purpose and achievement, making it a core part of the game's progression.

🔴Live Operations

For games that rely on regular content updates to keep players engaged, the economy is designed to support ongoing changes. New updates can introduce fresh resources or sinks to maintain balance and sustain player interest. Live operations play a crucial role in keeping a game relevant over time. Many of today’s most successful games depend on live operations, with economy balance as a key factor in their longevity.

⌛Conventional Approach

Multiple currencies in games, especially mobile games, are common. They are typically divided by value, with soft currency forming the foundation of progression and other currencies adding layers of complexity.

The value of a currency is usually defined by:

Conversion rates between soft and hard currency.
The effort required to obtain it.
Rarity-based scarcity that affects availability.
Limits on how it is earned or stored.

These elements help designers control the economy and guide player engagement. Many successful games use these tools effectively:

Strategy games like Clash of Clans casually introduce multiple currencies tied to different mechanics over time.
4X strategy games feature even more complex economies where understanding currency interactions is key to progression.
RPGs like Summoners War and AFK Arena use multiple currencies and gacha mechanics with rarity-based rewards.
Puzzle games like Candy Crush Saga and Gardenscapes use soft and hard currencies, such as gold bars and lives, to control progression.

A common way in economy design is to avoid currency loops where players spend a currency to generate more of the same. Designers also make conversions and effort levels slightly opaque, encouraging players to engage and figure things out.

Recently, there has been a slight shift in this approach, and the results have been promising.

📉New Normal?

While traditional economy strategies continue to be successful, evidenced by the continued success of many of the games mentioned, there's a noticeable shift toward simpler, more straightforward economy designs that require less mental effort from players.

I’ll highlight some games and genres that, in my observations, are experimenting with simplified economy designs and finding success. These are just high-level summaries, as each example could easily warrant a deep dive of its own.

🏰Merge Mansion

Games like Merge Mansion and Gossip Harbor are part of a growing genre, driven largely by their strong revenue potential.

A key design hook in these merge-based games is how they obscure the grind. Since merging requires two of the same item to upgrade, the numbers scale quickly. Upgrading an item to Level 10 from Level 9 may feel achievable, but in reality, it takes twice the effort of reaching Level 9, which itself took twice the effort of reaching Level 8, and so on.

Additional constraints like energy limits, generator cooldowns, and limited board space gradually increase complexity without making the mechanics feel overwhelming. The game remains easy to grasp while subtly guiding players into deeper engagement.

Another smart approach is how these games handle rewards. Coins, for example, are mainly used to progress the narrative rather than for multiple in-game functions. By simplifying currency use, the game can give out meaningful rewards without disrupting the core gameplay loops. Limited-time events and rewards then feel even more valuable, as they provide the items and power-ups needed for faster progression.

By streamlining currency systems and hiding complex calculations within an engaging core mechanic, these games have become some of the biggest recent successes in mobile free-to-play.

👑Royal Match

Many modern match-3 and puzzle games, like Royal Match, have streamlined their economies compared to earlier titles.

It’s easy to attribute Royal Match’s success to massive user acquisition spending (you’ve probably seen that crying King ad somewhere) but its place in the top tiers of the grossing charts suggests that players are not only engaging but also monetizing well.

On the surface, Royal Match is similar to Candy Crush Saga or Gardenscapes, but it has introduced subtle yet effective design tweaks to improve engagement. While the game does have a “lives” system, it is extremely generous with lives early on. This makes the early experience feel frictionless, allowing players to focus on coins, which are primarily used to buy extra moves when failing a level.

By creating an early illusion where lives don’t feel like a constraint, players ease into the game without worrying about restrictions. The accessible level design reinforces this feeling, keeping players engaged without frustration. Additionally, the game frequently offers free lives through limited-time events, which trigger a sunk cost fallacy—players stay longer to make the most of their free playtime. Meanwhile, short-term events that rely on maintaining streaks subtly push players to spend coins, making those moments feel more impactful.

This combination of well-tuned level design, a massive content pipeline, and a reduced emphasis on in-game gates and multiple currencies has made Royal Match one of the most engaging and successful puzzle games today.

🎲Monopoly Go!

Another massive revenue-generating game, Monopoly Go!, takes economy simplification even further.

At its core, the game follows a straightforward "numbers go up" design, making it instantly understandable to any player. It borrows heavily from social casino games like Coin Master, operating on a slot-machine-like loop where a random number determines a random reward. In this case, rolling dice serves as the slot mechanic, while progression is visualized through the Monopoly board.

Since the goal is simply to earn more rewards, the best way to do that is to roll more dice. This makes dice rolls the game’s most valuable currency, as they are directly tied to how much a player can engage with the game.

On paper, a loop where you spend a currency just to earn more of that same currency might seem redundant. However, games like Monopoly Go! make it compelling by increasing the reward values as players progress. Watching numbers scale up rapidly creates a strong sense of achievement, reinforcing the desire to keep playing.

By tying key rewards to progression layers, the game strengthens the incentive to move forward. The act of spending dice rolls is also the core game action, making the currency sink extremely effective. Additionally, the game introduces players gently, offering generous dice rolls early on. This allows them to get hooked on the loop without friction.

Wrapping a simple slot-based mechanic inside the familiar and friendly Monopoly theme makes the game highly accessible. Even if players don’t fully grasp everything happening on the board, the core action remains clear and engaging. Like Royal Match, this combination of ease of play, strong progression incentives, and well-balanced economy sinks has driven Monopoly Go! to massive financial success.

🐻Capybara Go!

This is a relatively recent game compared to the others I’ve mentioned.

At first glance, it feels like a simple "just press this one button" game, but as you play, it gradually evolves into something much deeper. Over time, it introduces heavier mechanics like gacha drops, upgrades, merging, and leveling systems.

The way this game unfolds is fascinating from a design perspective. It starts off with a progression loop similar to Monopoly Go!, where you repeatedly take the same action to advance. However, unlike Monopoly Go!, there is no immediate limit to how many times you can press the button. Instead, progression is controlled by random events triggered with each press, with outcomes influenced by various internal stats.

As the game expands, players uncover layers of mechanics, making it more comparable to complex mid-core titles. However, the way these systems interact is designed to keep the experience accessible for new players.

The economy follows a similar philosophy. At first glance, the game appears to have a lot of different currencies, which could seem overwhelming. But in practice, each currency has a highly specific and limited use. For example:

Coins are primarily used for leveling up your capybara.
Chests require unique keys that are only used for that specific chest.
Other upgrade or event-based currencies have restricted sinks, ensuring they don’t create confusion.

This structure allows the game to introduce complexity without overwhelming players. Those who enjoy min-maxing and strategic planning can dive deep, while more casual players can still make progress without worrying about every system.

It’s a great example of how a complex economy can be wrapped in an experience that feels simple and approachable. A similar design approach is also evident in Archero 2 from the same studio, which applies this style of progression to a different core gameplay loop.

🃏Candy Crush Solitaire

This game is the latest release in the Candy Crush franchise, which had a global launch just a couple of months ago. While it's still too early to draw any definitive conclusions about its success, I’ve noticed an interesting simplification of its economy in the few levels I’ve played.

One of the most noticeable features is that the game charges a currency cost upfront before you even start a level. If you win, you’re rewarded with the same currency, but in greater amounts than you spent to play.

This approach—requiring currency to access a level—might seem radical, but it addresses some value and perception issues in a clever way. It makes each attempt feel more meaningful, as you know that losing means you’ve spent currency for no gain. On the flip side, losing the currency also means you can’t play any further until you either win or earn more currency.

Although it might seem restrictive at first that you can’t play without spending soft currency, the game rewards you generously as you progress, encouraging continued engagement.

From a design perspective, requiring a specific amount of currency to play each level adds flexibility. The game can adjust the currency cost to make certain levels feel more, or less valuable. As you move through the game, the increasing coin cost serves to reinforce the idea that higher levels hold greater value.

This is a fascinating approach, and while it may not be entirely novel to this solitaire genre, it's still an interesting twist. Since the game is so new, only time will tell how successful it will become.

💀The Brainrot Effect

In the economy of action, effort is a cost, and the acquisition of skill is driven by the balance of benefits and costs. Laziness is built deep into our nature.

- Daniel Kahneman (Thinking, Fast and Slow)

As the amount of content continues to grow exponentially, players have more choices than ever. This applies not just to games but to all forms of entertainment. With so many options, the effort required to engage becomes a crucial barrier. This is why engagement mechanics that embrace "endless scroll" and the "TikTok-ification" of content consumption have been so successful.

When it comes to game economies—especially in mobile games, which are designed for quick, snackable engagement—this ease of entry becomes even more important. Many players discover these games through casual ad scrolls or passing mentions rather than active searches. The days when a only a handful of standout games were available on the app stores are long gone. Now, the games that succeed are often the ones that make it effortless for players to engage right away.

Mobile games also function as "second-screen" experiences. People play them while watching TV, commuting, or multitasking. This means that the engagement hooks need to work fast to capture attention.

Designing "laziness-friendly" systems—ones that require minimal initial effort but gradually reel players in—has become a key strategy. Not every game using this approach will be a breakout success, but it’s clear that the ones driving strong engagement metrics are often the ones that get this part of the design right.

📜TL,DR

Game Economies Are Designed for Control – Mobile games use multiple currencies, earnings (sources), and spending (sinks) to shape progression, balance resources, and encourage monetization.
A Shift Toward Simplicity – Modern games are moving away from complex economies, favoring streamlined systems that reduce cognitive load while maintaining engagement depth.
Hidden Complexity Drives Engagement – Merge-based games obscure grind through scaling mechanics, limited space, and energy systems, making progression feel natural and rewarding.
Frictionless Play Keeps Players Hooked – Some puzzle and match-3 games reduce early-game barriers with generous resources, free lives, and soft progression limits, making play sessions last longer.
Effortless Loops Create Addictive Progression – Games with simple, slot-machine-like mechanics use escalating rewards and progression incentives to keep players invested with minimal effort.
Brainrot Design Prioritizes Accessibility – Mobile games increasingly focus on "lazy-friendly" engagement, requiring minimal effort while maximizing retention, mirroring trends in broader digital consumption.

That was another one of my attempts at thought-posting here. It turned out lengthier than I imagined, and I feel like I could’ve gone even further. It’s tough for me to judge my own ideas, I often feel like that meme of a person over-explaining. Let me know your thoughts on my thoughts! And if there’s anything else you’d like my perspective on, feel free to reach out—I’d love to explore more!

Thanks for reading Game Design Bites! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

game design for the brainrot generation

Ishan Manjrekar — Mon, 10 Feb 2025 07:02:58 +0000

skibidi brrr to rizz up your game 🔥🎮

Photo by Daniele Levis Pelusi on Unsplash

You’ve likely noticed, and perhaps experienced, the decline in attention spans over the past few years. Whether it’s scrolling through social media, multitasking with an app or game while watching TV, or struggling to focus on a long paragraph, these behaviors have become increasingly common.

The decline in attention spans has given rise to the popular " brainrot" phenomenon, which was named Oxford’s "Word of the Year" for 2024. According to them, brainrot is defined as "the supposed deterioration of a person’s mental or intellectual state, particularly due to the overconsumption of trivial or unchallenging material, especially online content." It also refers to anything that may lead to such deterioration.

🌀_ Rabbit hole alert: _ If you’re interested in a short nerdy linguistic take about brainrot, I definitely recommend giving the following post a read.

when did brainrot begin?

The change in behavior influenced by this lower attentions spans has resulted in reactions like apparently even Netflix has set up some requirements on how their content should be written and presented to support this ‘casual viewing’, or a ‘second screen’ behavior. (read here)

🌀_ Rabbit hole alert: _ Another interesting, and well put together video take that explains this phenomenon quite well. (watch here)

😕What's the Game Connection?

Games, like any entertainment medium, evolve with shifting consumption trends. One way to explore this is by examining how broader trends influence how games are consumed.

Role of Free-to-Play in Shifting Consumption

Free-to-play (F2P) games, especially on mobile, offer a great perspective on this shift. These games are designed for accessibility—anyone can start playing for free.

If you’re making F2P games, monetization depends entirely on how engaging your game is. Since players don’t pay upfront, your goal is to create an experience so compelling that they choose to spend. This could be through direct in-game purchases or by engaging with ads. The more engaging the experience, the more likely players are to invest their time—and eventually, their money.

Evolution of F2P Engagement Mechanics

As mobile F2P games gained popularity, different engagement strategies have emerged. Early on, games offered a ‘free demo’ experience or added extra ‘premium’ content for paying users. The most successful approach, however, has been introducing ‘gating’ mechanics.

These mechanics require players to either wait and return later or pay to skip the wait or grind. Today, most top-performing F2P games use some form of time gating to drive engagement and monetization.

To recap, mobile F2P games rose in popularity as an accessible medium. To monetize players, new engagement mechanics emerged—time gating being one of the most enduring and effective.

To explore brainrot and F2P in the same breath, let’s dive deeper into these engagement hooks in games and examine how one might be influencing the other.

⌛Time Gating Shift

The concept of time gating has been around for a long time, primarily seen in early games like FarmVille with its energy mechanic. This system limited your gameplay actions, forcing you to either wait, engage with friends, or pay to continue. Facebook games popularized this approach, making games more accessible through social connections and timed progression.

As mobile F2P games evolved, energy systems appeared in many forms—and they worked. Early notable examples include:

CSR Racing
Candy Crush Saga
Clash of Clans
Clash Royale

The core mechanic was consistent: play for a short session, then hit a progress block. To continue, players had to wait or pay to skip the downtime. Different games presented this mechanic in various ways—ranging from energy bars to lives systems tied to friend connections, or slot-based mechanics that limited progress after your slots filled up.

Another shared feature was the session design. As a new player, you’d get around 20–30 minutes of uninterrupted play before hitting a hard time gate. This model became the standard for mobile F2P games.

How Time Gating is Changing

Over time, a subtle shift has occurred. Modern F2P games still use time gating but in a softer, more player-friendly way , especially during early sessions. Notable examples include:

Royal Match
Monopoly Go!
Merge Mansion
Capybara Go

While older games blocked progress early, these newer titles allow longer first sessions without interruption. Time gates are still there but appear much later compared to earlier games.

For instance, in Monopoly Go!, dice rolls are the currency that limits your progress. However, early on, you receive so many rolls that you can play for an extended time without hitting a block. The experience feels generous and keeps you engaged longer.

Royal Match re-engages returning players with unlimited lives for a short period, giving them longer, rewarding sessions after a break. Meanwhile, Capybara Go offers a “slot machine”-like experience with constant rewards during the initial sessions, allowing players to keep playing without interruption.

The Rise of Super Casual Design

This shift has brought casual, uninterrupted gameplay front and center, contributing to the App Store success of these games. In a market where overall industry growth has slowed, this super casual approach is showing impressive results.

While these trends are often described with terms like hyper-casual or hybrid-casual , what stands out is how these games allow long, early gameplay sessions without aggressive gating. This lenient, player-first approach is a big reason behind their growing popularity and success.

🤔Why?

With so many F2P games out there, competition is fierce. To stand out, you must offer a seamless, engaging experience that keeps players hooked. But the challenge doesn’t just come from other games anymore—there’s a new contender in the attention economy: brainrot.

Games are entertainment—and so is brainrot.

In traditional F2P design, the goal was to create just enough engagement to leave players wanting more. A 10–20 minute session gave players a satisfying taste, leaving them eager to return later. Time gating worked well because players anticipated the next rewarding session.

But social media has changed the game. With endless, scrollable content and instant sensory rewards at every swipe, players can easily shift from waiting in your game to getting their dopamine hit elsewhere. Competing for attention is no longer just about beating other games—you’re up against an infinite feed that never blocks progress.

This shift has created a new challenge: short-term memory. The fleeting nature of scrolling has conditioned players to quickly forget what they were doing. To counter this, games need longer, more memorable early sessions to build a stronger connection and remind players to come back.

Recent successful games have adapted by extending their first-time user experience (FTUE), offering longer, uninterrupted sessions that help players get deeply invested before any gating mechanics kick in.

📜TL,DR

Declining attention spans and the rise of "brainrot" (mental decline from trivial content) are influencing how we consume entertainment.
Free-to-play (F2P) mobile games need to adapt to this shift, by evolving their time gating (waiting or paying to progress) mechanics.
Games like CSR Racing and Candy Crush used energy systems, limiting playtime and encouraging players to wait or pay.
Modern F2P games, like Royal Match and Monopoly Go!, have shifted to less intrusive time gating, offering longer, uninterrupted early sessions to enhance player experience.
The "super casual" design approach focuses on providing longer, rewarding early gameplay sessions, making it easier to capture players’ attention.
Social media’s endless content has raised the stakes for games, with players easily distracted and moving on to other instant rewards.
Successful games now extend their first-time user experience (FTUE), offering longer, uninterrupted sessions to deepen player investment before introducing time gates.
The competition is no longer just between games; it's against infinite, easily accessible content in the attention economy.

This was my attempt at connecting some seemingly random ideas and weaving together broader topics into a cohesive thread. Did you like this new approach to thought-posting? Let me know your thoughts on my thoughts! And if there’s anything else you’d like my perspective on, feel free to reach out—I’d love to explore more!

🤝If you like reading such posts, do subscribe for FREE to receive new posts and support my work.

Is Game Design A One-Person Show?

Ishan Manjrekar — Mon, 08 Jul 2024 05:01:09 +0000

Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya on Unsplash

What comes to mind when you think of game design? Is it the intricate coding, stunning visuals, or immersive storylines? While these elements are crucial, there's a core aspect of game design that often goes unnoticed: effective communication and collaboration. Creating a game is rarely a solo endeavor. It's a symphony of different talents and skills coming together to bring a vision to life. So, how do you ensure that everyone on the team shares the same vision and works harmoniously towards the same goal?

🎩Understand The Roles

Broadly speaking, in game production, there are several key roles, each with its own focus and responsibilities:

Game Design + User Experience (UX): Crafting the game's mechanics and ensuring an enjoyable user experience.
Product Management: These are the "money people" who make critical decisions, especially if the game is a business venture.
Production: The planners and schedulers who keep the project on track.
Engineering: The technical wizards who bring your ideas to life through code.
Art: The creatives who turn concepts into visually appealing assets.
Quality Assurance (QA): The gatekeepers who ensure everything works as intended before release.
Miscellaneous: Other vital teams like Marketing, who help promote and sell the game.

If you're fortunate enough to handle all these roles by yourself, your task is straightforward: convince yourself of your ideas and execute them. However, in a professional setting, you'll interact with various specialists, each with different skills and objectives.

To excel at game design, you need to know these key roles and responsibilities—so you can communicate efficiently and bring your vision to life.

🏔️Understand Motivations

Each role in game development has its own unique motivations and focuses. As a designer, you're the linchpin that connects all these roles. To effectively convey your vision, you need to understand what drives each team member.

For instance:

An engineer might not be overly concerned about the color of a button but will focus on its functionality.
An artist might prioritize the aesthetics of the game world over the speed of moving obstacles.
A producer is more interested in how your design fits within deadlines and budget constraints.

Your job is to tailor your communication to address these specific interests. This means explaining different aspects of your design in ways that resonate with each role's priorities.

⚖️Calibrate Conversations

Effective collaboration starts with understanding. Spend time talking to people across different teams. Learn about their challenges and what excites them. This knowledge will help you communicate your ideas more effectively.

Once you grasp each role's motivations, collaboration becomes smoother, leading to better outcomes.

Poor collaboration is often a major reason for product failure.

As a designer, you need to bridge the gaps between different teams and ensure everyone is enthusiastic about your vision.

For example:

Discuss button placement and functionality with engineers , focusing on how it impacts gameplay mechanics.
Talk to artists about how visuals can enhance the user experience.
Engage producers in conversations about timelines and how your design choices fit within project deadlines.

Tailoring your conversations to the right audience is crucial for successful collaboration.

🛠️Use Effective Tools

As a designer, your primary goal is to communicate ideas clearly. The tools you use to do this can vary widely, and it's essential not to limit yourself. Whether it's pen and paper, long documents, slideshows, or even minor code tweaks, the tool should serve the purpose of conveying your vision effectively.

Different situations call for different tools. Sometimes a simple sketch can explain a concept better than a lengthy document. At other times, a detailed presentation might be necessary to get everyone on the same page.

📜TL;DR

Recognize Roles: Understand each role's responsibilities in game production.
Identify Motivations: Learn what drives each team member to tailor your communication.
Enhance Collaboration: Engage with team members to address their priorities and ensure alignment.
Use Versatile Tools: Clearly communicate ideas using the best tools for each situation.

In conclusion, effective collaboration in game development hinges on shared vision and clear communication across all roles. Recognizing each team member's motivations and tailoring your approach is key to success. If you found these insights helpful, please share this post or leave your feedback.

Consider subscribing for more posts. Also, don't forget to ask any questions you have about the profession—I’ll try and help answer them.

Thanks for reading Game Design Bites! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.