Sacrifice in Design

You're a designer.
You make a list of kickin' rad game features.
You talk to the producers.
That list is cut in half.

Such is fate. But during my time working for a major company in Chicago, I was witness to the ongoing back and forth between a game's desired features and direction, and the time/money it would take to implement them. I was involved in only a few talks of design, and scolded for some, but all in all it boiled down to sacrifice. So as a designer, it comes down to this: What is the core of the game, what is the fluff? Cut the fluff, keep the core.

By all means it isn't a bad thing to want to have a plethora of features to a game. The scope can ramp up on you, higher and higher till suddenly you have programmers shaking their heads and producers tapping the calender where it's marked "ship date" and "final certification." A careful hand of balance will guide you through this time. Find out what's good, what will make it still have that touch it needs for the gamer to know it's a unique experience. No two games should ever be too alike, even in the case of sequels. Controls may stay the same, but the experience should change so the player has a reason to enjoy the game over the old one, while also appreciating and loading up the old one from time to time.

So when you're playing that game, and you think about all the great features in it, cry and lament that there were probably pages of pages of extra features that didn't make it, and pray for a sequel.