David Strachan’s game-design essay argues the whole concept of a difficulty curve is wrong: games shouldn’t ramp up smoothly, they should be built around a difficulty saw — a series of mechanic-introduction arcs, each with its own curve. The insight came from Lemmings designer Russell Kay, who smoothed difficulty by breaking step-changes into chapters rather than difficulty settings, letting players choose and set expectations. The core problem: developers get good at their own game and lose the first-time-player mindset, so “how hard should a jump be” becomes meaningless without deliberate structure. Instead of one global ramp, group mechanics together and give each its own teach → practice → press arc — a new enemy type, ability, puzzle type, way of using a system (Mario’s triple jump), item, or rule. Smoothing means removing too-hard/too-easy spikes per mechanic, not flattening everything. The essay’s practical spine is the DO/DON’T list: optional collectables, alternate routes, dynamic difficulty adjustment (“actual magic sauce”), multiple learning channels (text, voiceover, button prompts, particles, visual cues), show-don’t-tell before giving a new weapon — but never punish bad performance with harder future attempts, never let players skip an area before learning its skill, never hide the main mechanic. Finding your skill curve empirically: death-location clusters (Mario Maker-style), level-completion deltas (80% finish L4 but 20% finish L5 → L5 is too hard or boring), structured tester questions on a spreadsheet, and watching streamed gameplay. It’s impossible to make a game for everyone — pick a target market. And the Portal 2 knowledge-shortcut trick: hide a level-skip that requires techniques learned later in the game, because if someone can trick their way to the end, the level has nothing to teach them.

Read the full essay at davetech.co.uk