Add director gates system: shared review checkpoints across all workflow skills

Creates .claude/docs/director-gates.md as a central registry of 18 named gate
prompts (CD-*, TD-*, PR-*, LP-*, QL-*, ND-*, AD-*) covering all 7 production
stages. Skills now reference gate IDs instead of embedding inline director prompts,
eliminating drift when prompts need updating.

Updated 15 skills to use gate IDs: brainstorm, map-systems, design-system,
architecture-decision, create-architecture, create-epics, create-stories,
sprint-plan, milestone-review, playtest-report, prototype, story-done,
gate-check, setup-engine, start.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude/skills/setup-engine/SKILL.md

@@ -32,32 +32,84 @@ If no engine is specified, run an interactive engine selection process:
   > you want to build — it will also recommend an engine. Or tell me about your
   > game and I can help you pick."
 
-### If the user wants to pick without a concept, ask:
+### If the user wants to pick without a concept, ask in this order:
+
+**Question 1 — Prior experience** (ask this first, always, via `AskUserQuestion`):
+- Prompt: "Have you worked in any of these engines before?"
+- Options: `Godot` / `Unity` / `Unreal Engine 5` / `Multiple — I'll explain` / `None of them`
+- If they pick a specific engine → recommend that engine. Prior experience outweighs all other factors. Confirm with them and skip the matrix.
+- If "None" or "Multiple" → continue to the questions below.
+
+**Questions 2-6 — Decision matrix inputs** (only if no prior engine experience):
+
+**Question 2 — Target platform** (ask this second, always, via `AskUserQuestion` — platform eliminates or heavily weights engines before any other factor):
+- Prompt: "What platforms are you targeting for this game?"
+- Options: `PC (Steam / Epic)` / `Mobile (iOS / Android)` / `Console` / `Web / Browser` / `Multiple platforms`
+- Platform rules that feed directly into the recommendation:
+  - Mobile → Unity strongly preferred; Unreal is a poor fit; Godot is viable for simple mobile
+  - Console → Unity or Unreal; Godot console support requires third-party publishers or significant extra work
+  - Web → Godot exports cleanly to web; Unity WebGL is functional; Unreal has poor web support
+  - PC only → all engines viable; other factors decide
+  - Multiple → Unity is the most portable across PC/mobile/console
+
 1. **What kind of game?** (2D, 3D, or both?)
-2. **What platforms?** (PC, mobile, console, web?)
-3. **Primary input method?** (keyboard/mouse, gamepad, touch, or mixed?)
-4. **Team size and experience?** (solo beginner, solo experienced, small team?)
-5. **Any strong language preferences?** (GDScript, C#, C++, visual scripting?)
-6. **Budget for engine licensing?** (free only, or commercial licenses OK?)
+2. **Primary input method?** (keyboard/mouse, gamepad, touch, or mixed?)
+3. **Team size and experience?** (solo beginner, solo experienced, small team?)
+4. **Any strong language preferences?** (GDScript, C#, C++, visual scripting?)
+5. **Budget for engine licensing?** (free only, or commercial licenses OK?)
 
 ### Produce a recommendation
 
-Use this decision matrix:
+Do NOT use a simple scoring matrix that eliminates engines. Instead, reason through the user's profile against the honest tradeoffs below, then present 1-2 recommendations with full context. Always end with the user choosing — never force a verdict.
 
-| Factor | Godot 4 | Unity | Unreal Engine 5 |
-|--------|---------|-------|-----------------|
-| **Best for** | 2D games, small 3D, solo/small teams | Mobile, mid-scope 3D, cross-platform | AAA 3D, photorealism, large teams |
-| **Language** | GDScript (+ C#, C++ via extensions) | C# | C++ / Blueprint |
-| **Cost** | Free, MIT license | Free under revenue threshold | Free under revenue threshold, 5% royalty |
-| **Learning curve** | Gentle | Moderate | Steep |
-| **2D support** | Excellent (native) | Good (but 3D-first engine) | Possible but not ideal |
-| **3D quality ceiling** | Good (improving rapidly) | Very good | Best-in-class |
-| **Web export** | Yes (native) | Yes (limited) | No |
-| **Console export** | Via third-party | Yes (with license) | Yes |
-| **Open source** | Yes | No | Source available |
+**Engine honest tradeoffs:**
 
-Present the top 1-2 recommendations with reasoning tied to the user's answers.
-Let the user choose — never force a recommendation.
+**Godot 4**
+- Genuine strengths: 2D (best in class), stylized/indie 3D, rapid iteration, free forever (MIT), open source, gentlest learning curve, best for solo devs who want full control
+- Real limitations: 3D ecosystem is thin compared to Unity/Unreal (fewer tutorials, assets, community answers for 3D-specific problems); large open-world 3D is very hard and largely untested in Godot; console export requires third-party publishers or significant extra work; smaller professional job market
+- Licensing reality: Truly free with no revenue thresholds ever. MIT license means you own everything.
+- Best fit: 2D games of any scope; stylized/atmospheric 3D; contained 3D worlds (not open-world); first game projects where learning curve matters; projects where budget is a hard constraint at any scale
+
+**Unity**
+- Genuine strengths: Industry standard for mid-scope 3D and mobile; massive asset store and tutorial ecosystem; C# is a professional language; best console certification support for indie; strong community for almost every genre
+- Real limitations: Licensing controversy in 2023 damaged trust (runtime fee was proposed then walked back — the risk of policy changes remains real); C# has a steeper initial curve than GDScript; heavier editor than Godot for simple projects
+- Licensing reality: Free under $200K revenue AND 200K installs (Unity Personal/Plus). Only becomes costly if the game is genuinely successful — most indie games never hit this threshold. The 2023 controversy is worth knowing about but the actual current terms are reasonable for most indie developers.
+- Best fit: Mobile games; mid-scope 3D; games targeting console; developers with C# background; projects needing large asset store; teams of 2-5
+
+**Unreal Engine 5**
+- Genuine strengths: Best-in-class 3D visuals (Lumen, Nanite, Chaos physics); industry standard for AAA and photorealistic 3D; large open-world support is mature and production-tested; Blueprint visual scripting lowers C++ barrier; strong for games targeting high-end PC or console
+- Real limitations: Steepest learning curve; heaviest editor (slow compile times, large project sizes); overkill for stylized/2D/small-scope games; C++ is genuinely hard; not suitable for mobile or web; 5% royalty past $1M gross revenue
+- Licensing reality: 5% royalty only applies AFTER $1M gross revenue per title. For a first game or any game that doesn't reach $1M, it costs nothing. This threshold is high enough that most indie developers will never pay it.
+- Best fit: AAA-quality 3D; large open-world games; photorealistic visuals; developers with C++ experience or willing to use Blueprint; games targeting high-end PC/console where visual fidelity is a core selling point
+
+**Genre-specific guidance** (factor this into the recommendation):
+- 2D any style → Godot strongly preferred
+- 3D stylized / atmospheric / contained world → Godot viable, Unity solid alternative
+- 3D open world (large, seamless) → Unity or Unreal; Godot is not production-proven for this
+- 3D photorealistic / AAA-quality → Unreal
+- Mobile-first → Unity strongly preferred
+- Console-first → Unity or Unreal; Godot console support requires extra work
+- Horror / narrative / walking sim → any engine; match to art style and team experience
+- Action RPG / Soulslike → Unity or Unreal for 3D; community support and assets matter here
+- Platformer 2D → Godot
+- Strategy / top-down / RTS → Godot or Unity depending on 2D vs 3D
+
+**Recommendation format:**
+1. Show a comparison table with the user's specific factors as rows
+2. Give a primary recommendation with honest reasoning
+3. Name the best alternative and when to choose it instead
+4. Explicitly state: "This is a starting point, not a verdict — you can always migrate engines, and many developers switch between projects."
+5. Use `AskUserQuestion` to confirm: "Does this recommendation feel right, or would you like to explore a different engine?"
+   - Options: `[Primary engine] (Recommended)` / `[Alternative engine]` / `[Third engine]` / `Explore further` / `Type something`
+
+**If the user picks "Explore further":**
+Use `AskUserQuestion` with concept-specific deep-dive topics. Always generate these options from the user's actual concept — do not use generic options. Always include at minimum:
+- The primary engine's specific limitations for this concept (e.g., "How far can Godot 3D actually go for [genre]?")
+- The alternative engine's specific tradeoffs for this concept
+- Language choice impact on this concept's technical challenges
+- Any concept-specific technical concern (e.g., adaptive audio, open-world streaming, multiplayer netcode)
+
+The user can select multiple topics. Answer each selected topic in depth before returning to the engine confirmation question.
 
 ---