The First Question of Game Balance

So, yeah, this game balance thing. Some of the conversations I've read on forums about it have given me the impression that the people discussing it don't know what they're talking about, if anything at all. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if someone had decided that game balance is a myth and those who talk about it are living in their own little fantasy world.

It's easy to see why some people think this for the simple fact that game balance doesn't have an elegant demo. I'll get back to that in another post.

My view isn't that game balance is a myth, but my view (as I write this) is fairly close. If game balance is a worthwhile game design concept then it's only worthwhile if it helps game designers make better games. Otherwise, it's not a game design concept. I mean, really, if it isn't useful to the actual process of making games, then someone would do just as well talking about cardboard boxes as a game design concept.



My view is that game balance is a valid game design concept, but it's also like a screwdriver few people know how to use and thus think it's a magic wand, or is being used in the wrong way like if you were to use a screwdriver to drive in nails.

My simple definition of game balance is "a state of equilibrium between two or more elements of a game."

Achieving a balance between two elements of a game can be an important thing to do, but only if there are consequences to the imbalance. For example, if the balance between the lengths of the wings of an airplane are off by too much, it will fly in circles and be more difficult to steer in the opposite direction. If there is no consequence due to an imbalance, it's not really an imbalance. It's bullshit.

So, the first thing to ask in any conversation about game balance is: "What would happen if X was significantly unbalanced?", where X is whatever the point of balance is. If there's no simple straightforward answer to this, then you can be sure you're talking to someone who at least doesn't know what they're trying to do. After all, avoiding the consequences of the imbalance is the point of creating a balance, isn't it?

If there is a simple, straightforward answer to the question, then what the person is talking about and why it matters should be reasonably clear. After all, they've just told you why as clearly as a tightrope walker can tell you why balance is important to them.