A batch approach to content creation?

A mantra like “batching” is never universal. It is as you said, it lets you create a large batch of things that are coherent / designed in one flow. That has its place. However, it is also true that if you always make everything as a big batch because you have to obey the mantra, then you will produce lots of separate batches that are internally coherent maybe, but the total whole no longer fits. As a designer, you need to be able to view the project at a high level, and see the grand scheme of things, such as overall coherence and the ability to take a step back and objectively judge the current state of it, but you also need the ability to focus on small areas at a fine level of detail. Think of it like drawing a picture. You start by doing a rough sketch, filling out the general structure of the scene very quickly, but then you need to also take the time to refine the outlines and draw all the details in the scene, and constantly revisit and balance the various areas of the image so that it all still fits.

stranger32 said:
Should I, like him, think long about every item in the game, or not?

You need to dedicate enough time to refinement until you reach something that is a well-rounded whole.

Productivity methods aren't universal and always have strengths and weaknesses and you have to pick the method of working that fits the situation. And every time you put work into the project, the situation changes slightly, and you might have to reconsider your method of working regularly as well.

stranger32 wrote:

At the core of my doubts is the belief that content created in this way may not be of high quality due to its lack of thorough thought.

But is this really the case?

I think there is a relationship you have overlooked.

Say you need 30 different swords.
You model them quickly in a batch, repeating the same steps to become faster at them, ideally sharing some work across all of them (e.g. some initial low poly template).
Then you question if each sword got enough love, or if each sword unique enough.

But the answer depends on the application of your content, and at a number of 30, it's likely we get some batching behavior there too.
For example, i play some RPG and find a sword. I take it and use it for combat.
After a while i find another sword. I compare stats and equip the better one.
After 200 hours i have 30 different swords in my inventory. I have 3 favorite swords with highest stats which i frequently use. The others are just bloat in my inventory and i should sell them.

Notice: I have played 200 hours, but never i did pay attention to artistic details modeled into those swords. I just compared stats.

The whole situation would be different for both of us if there would be only one sword in the game.
But as offered quantity increases, attention and expectation on quality decreases. And there is no way to avoid this, so there is no reason to increase the quality of everything uniformly. Increasing quality only makes sense for a conscious selection, meant to drive attention, and resulting in a perceptual high quality of everything else too.
Only some things need to shine. The rest just has to fit together.

So, batch on, i would say.
But maybe you need to find a better reason why you stopped doing it.
Maybe because it is more boring, and you feel like a robot due to repetition.
However, optimizing workflows feels rewarding too, and it can compensate for the loss.

First off, moving, this isn't about 'writing for games', the art of writing the stories, instead it's about general gameplay content.

As for thoughts, agreed with JoeJ. This is about thinking in terms of systems. Build a core system that is flexible, then apply the modifications.

In a weapons system, a sword is a sword is a sword. They may have different icons and different stats, but done well they're all just generic melee weapons with stats. A gun is a gun is a gun, and may also be a bow is a bow is a bow. Maybe different icons and stats, but generic ranged weapons. Armor is armor is armor, they're all just armor.

Same with other systems. A vehicle is like any other vehicle, this one is red and that one is blue, but fundamentally they're in a pattern the player can use. A transport system is a transport system, this elevator leads to different levels than that elevator, but for they player they're functionally identical. An artist may give different models, this one is shiny and mirrored, that one is art deco, this one is glass with a view, that one is run down and battered, but fundamentally they're a stock object moving from point A to point B.

stranger32 wrote:

I've tried creating an entire category of weapons instead of creating a single weapon, and I've been consistent throughout my work.

You are wasting your time. You don't actually have a coherent game design reason why you need "an entire category of weapons". You haven't thought about how this variety of weapons would ever be used in a real game. Thinking about such things is hard work and you haven't done it. Probably because this idea of batching, plays to your strength of just chucking out more visual images of stuff, rather than dealing with the hard and thorny problem of what they actually are, as game mechanical elements.

Let's say you knew and were determined to make a game about knights jousting each other on horseback. Would you need to be designing a dozen different lances for that? No, you would not. There's something more basically pressing, like how you're going to control the horse, the lance, and the shield at the same time.

Even if you did historical research and found out there were actually dozens of lance variations, including those as a first go would be pointless. Almost nobody living today who would buy your game, is a lancing expert. Nobody has seen lots of variations on lances in film or TV. They've always just seen 2 knights going at it, with accompanying bravado and posturing before the fight. That's all the drama is, to the lay person. You need to get at least that far before you start worrying about details.

Details could be an expansion pack, if your game product ever survives long enough to make money and warrant a sequel. And who knows, at such a time, you may have better things to do. Like maybe more of your customers want different breeds of horses or something.

So... why are you wasting your time this way?

1) Haven't iterated, brainstormed, or scribbled in a notebook enough to have a coherent game design vision. No "main thrust" of what you're trying to accomplish.

2) Don't like something about some other task you know needs doing to make progress. So you theorize about batching and Tolkien instead. It's more interesting to contemplate Tolkien's life output, for sure. But one lesson you should take away from his life: he wasn't really a finisher. Obviously his economic livelihood was not made to depend upon his fantasy work, so he dawdled at it. Do you really want that to be you?