This study originates from the awareness that the role of game planning is
introduced and categorized in a fragmented manner, primarily through job postings,
job descriptions, and some publicly available case studies. This approach fails to
adequately...
This study originates from the awareness that the role of game planning is
introduced and categorized in a fragmented manner, primarily through job postings,
job descriptions, and some publicly available case studies. This approach fails to
adequately explain the actual workflow and the structure of professional
competencies within the game development field. Previous discussions have merely
categorized planning domains in a list-like manner, lacking systematic examination
of which planning tasks presuppose others, which deliverables they depend on, and
how planning competencies of differing natures form hierarchical structures.
Therefore, this study aims to reconstruct game planning from two perspectives:
‘a dependency structure based on workflow’ and ‘a hierarchical structure based on
task characteristics’. Through this, it seeks to present a classification system for
game planning and a basic framework for game system planning methodology.
First, based on prior research, industry materials, and practical experience, the
main domains of game planning were derived. The preceding and subsequent
relationships between deliverables, based on concept planning and game system
planning, were organized to construct a workflow-based classification system
divided into preceding planning, subsequent planning, and independent planning.
Subsequently, focusing on the structure where the professional competencies
required for each planning domain are not isolated individual skills, but rather
where the expertise demanded in one domain is applied and integrated in a more
specialized form within another domain to generate its deliverables, a hierarchical
structure based on work characteristics was proposed, divided into three levels:
“Inherent Competency-Based Level,” “Applied Thinking-Based Level,” and
“Complex Expansion Application-Based Level.”
The Inherent Competency-Based Level includes concept planning, system
planning, and scenario planning, which directly require inherent planning capabilities
and creativity, regardless of understanding other planning domains. The Applied
Thinking-Based Level consists of data balance planning and UI planning, which
apply these essential competencies within more specific implementation contexts.
The Complex Expansion Application-based Level is defined as planning that
requires work competencies where capabilities from multiple planning domains are
organically combined and expanded, such as level design, combat planning, quest
planning, and economic balance planning.
To verify the validity and practical applicability of these two structures, a
survey was conducted among domestic game planning practitioners. The distribution
of responses, basic statistics, and partial correlation analysis were used to examine
the characteristics and structural relationships within each domain.
Survey results showed high acceptance of the hierarchical structure based on
task nature as a conceptual classification criterion. Agreement rates for the three-tier
classification (‘Inherent Competency-Based → Applied Thinking-Based → Complex
Expansion Application-Based’) and the classification criteria themselves reached
approximately 96%. While agreement rates for the classification of individual
planning domains within each tier were relatively lower, even the lowest-agreed
item received 67.9% agreement, indicating that over two-thirds of respondents
agreed. This confirms the proposed hierarchical structure reasonably reflects
practical perceptions. Simultaneously, the relatively low agreement rate for some
items, particularly within the ‘Inherent Capability-Based’ tier, suggests a need to
incorporate more diverse practical characteristics in defining this tier and setting its
categories.
The classification of planning tasks as preceding, following, or independent
from a workflow perspective also generally aligned with practitioners' perceptions of
precedence and dependency across most domains. However, significant variation in
responses regarding precedence and follow-up assignments emerged in some areas,
revealing boundary domains where roles are differently assigned depending on
project characteristics or organizational structure.
This study holds significance in presenting a foundational framework for
viewing game planning not merely as a list of roles, but simultaneously through
two axes: dependency relationships within the workflow and a competency
hierarchy based on task characteristics.
The classification model proposed in this study is closer to a foundational
model with limitations, as it does not fully reflect various internal and external
factors such as game genre, volume, development status, and team composition. It
is not a universally applicable, complete model for all genres or organizations.
Nevertheless, it has the potential to serve as one of the reference points for future
research attempting comparative analysis based on genre, platform, and
organizational structure, as well as refining the definitions of individual tiers.