DonchitosandClaude Opus 5.5
b21fa0f7f2
Fix release for 1.1.1: the minimal path end to end, engine commands that run on Godot, Unity and Unreal, hook warnings you can see, and verdicts that say when they could not check. Details in CHANGELOG.md; upgrade steps in UPGRADING.md (v1.1.1 → v1.1.2). Fixes #67 Fixes #131 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WuJn2FdynEybfL5KC697nJ
5.3 KiB
Vertical Slice Report: [Concept Name]
Date: [YYYY-MM-DD] Slice Duration: [N days] Target Scope: 3–5 minutes of polished, continuous gameplay Source GDD: design/gdd/game-concept.md
Validation Question
[The full game loop question this build was proving — both experience AND feasibility: "Does a player, starting from nothing, experience [core fantasy] within [N] minutes, without developer guidance — and can we build one such loop in [X] days at representative quality?"]
Scope Built
[Systems implemented, art quality level, what was intentionally omitted.]
Systems included:
- [System 1]
- [System 2]
- [...]
Art/audio quality level: [Placeholder / Representative / Near-shipping] Shortcuts taken deliberately: [List] What was cut from original scope: [List]
Build Velocity Log
[Day-by-day record of what was completed. This is your real production rate data — use it in sprint planning.]
| Day | Completed |
|---|---|
| Day 1 | [What was built] |
| Day 2 | [What was built] |
| Day 3 | [What was built] |
| ... | ... |
Total elapsed: [N days] for [scope summary] Velocity estimate: [N hours per equivalent scope unit — e.g., "1 day per combat encounter, 0.5 days per UI screen"]
Playtest Results
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Total sessions | [N] |
| Internal testers | [N] |
| External testers | [N — people who had not seen the game, if available] |
| Avg session length | [N minutes (target: [N] minutes)] |
| Time to first meaningful action | [N seconds (target: [N] seconds)] |
Observations
[Specific, non-opinion observations from playtest sessions. Quote testers where useful.]
Where testers succeeded without guidance:
- [...]
Where testers were confused or stuck:
- [...]
Emotional reactions observed:
- [...]
Metrics
| Metric | Target | Actual |
|---|---|---|
| Time to first meaningful action | [N sec] | [N sec] |
| Session length | [N min] | [N min] |
| Critical fun blockers found | 0 | [N] |
| Pipeline blockers found | 0 | [N] |
| Architecture surprises | 0 | [N] |
Feel assessment: [Specific — "combat feedback weak; no impact sound on hit" not "felt rough"]
Recommendation: [PROCEED / PIVOT / KILL / NOT ASSESSED — the slice was built but nobody has played it]
[One paragraph with evidence — reference the validation question directly. Did a player experience the core fantasy within the target time, without developer guidance? Can the team build at this quality on the projected schedule?]
Creative Director review (CD-PLAYTEST): [APPROVE / CONCERNS / REJECT / NOT ASSESSED — the director's reason; or "not run — [review mode]"]
If Proceeding
Production requirements (what must change from slice to production):
- [e.g., "Replace placeholder art with shipped assets"]
- [e.g., "Combat system needs 2 more weapon types"]
Architecture adjustments needed:
- [ADR to update or create]
Sprint velocity estimate based on slice data:
- [e.g., "1 day per enemy type, 2 days per level section, 0.5 days per UI screen"]
Scope adjustments from original design:
- [What the slice revealed about the true production scope]
Performance targets: [Confirmed / Revised — list changes if revised]
Playtest note: Run /playtest-report to structure additional session data
before running /gate-check production.
Next steps:
/create-epics layer:foundation— plan Foundation layer epics/create-epics layer:core— plan Core layer epics/create-stories [epic-slug]— break each epic into stories/sprint-plan— use velocity data from this report in the estimate/gate-check production— formally advance to Production
If Not Assessed
[The slice was built but nobody has played it through, so there is no evidence for PROCEED, PIVOT or KILL yet.]
Next step: play the slice unguided (at least one documented session), then
re-run /vertical-slice — it resumes from the checkpoint in
production/session-state/active.md.
If Pivoting
[Which GDDs need revision and why — be specific about the failure mode observed.]
Systems requiring GDD revision: [List]
Architecture decisions to revisit: [List — use /architecture-decision to update]
Core loop change needed: [What specifically to change]
Next steps:
/design-system [mechanic]— revise affected GDDs/architecture-decision [decision]— address architecture issues/vertical-slice— re-validate after revisions
If Killing
[Why the full game loop does not work at this quality level. What specifically prevented the player from experiencing the core fantasy. What to do instead.]
Next step: /brainstorm to explore a new direction, or /prototype [new-concept]
to test a different concept cheaply before investing in another vertical slice.
Lessons Learned
-
What assumptions were broken by building to near-production quality? [...]
-
What surprised us about the pipeline or architecture? [...]
-
What would we change about the slice scope if we ran this again? [...]
Vertical slice code location:
prototypes/[concept-name]-vertical-slice/This code is reference material only. Production implementation is written from scratch. Never import or refactor this code into production.