mirror of
https://github.com/Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios.git
synced 2026-10-16 10:17:06 +00:00
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
3.4 KiB
3.4 KiB
Gate definition, loaded by
/gate-checkfor the TARGET PHASE ONLY. Never load the other five — one gate applies per invocation.
Gate: Production → Polish
Required Artifacts:
- The code root has active code organized into subsystems
- All core mechanics from GDD are implemented (cross-reference
design/gdd/with the code root) - Main gameplay path is playable end-to-end
- Test files exist under the engine's test root —
tests/unit/andtests/integration/(Godot),Assets/Tests/EditMode/andAssets/Tests/PlayMode/(Unity),Source/<Module>/Private/Tests/(Unreal) — covering Logic and Integration stories - All Logic stories from this sprint have corresponding unit test files in the engine's unit-test location (
tests/unit/,Assets/Tests/EditMode/orSource/<Module>/Private/Tests/) - Smoke check has been run with a PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS verdict — report exists in
production/qa/ - At least one QA plan exists in
production/qa/(generated by/qa-plan) covering this sprint, the final production sprint, or this production phase — run/qa-planif missing (CONCERNS — advisory, not blocking) - QA sign-off report exists in
production/qa/(generated by/team-qa) with verdict APPROVED or APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS - At least 3 distinct playtest sessions documented in
production/qa/playtests/ - Playtest reports cover: new player experience, mid-game systems, and difficulty curve
- Fun hypothesis from Game Concept has been explicitly validated or revised
Quality Checks:
- Tests are passing (run test suite via Bash)
- No open S1 Critical bugs in any bug tracker or known issues
- Core loop plays as designed (compare to GDD acceptance criteria)
- Performance is within budget (check
performance.*inproject.yaml, else technical-preferences.md targets) - Playtest findings have been reviewed and critical fun issues addressed (not just documented)
- No "confusion loops" identified — no point in the game where >50% of playtesters got stuck without knowing why
- Difficulty curve matches the Difficulty Curve design doc (if one exists at
design/difficulty-curve.md) - All implemented screens have corresponding UX specs (no "designed in-code" screens)
- Interaction pattern library is up-to-date with all patterns used in implementation
- Accessibility compliance verified against committed tier in
design/accessibility-requirements.md
Workflow tier reductions
The checklist above is the full baseline. At lower tiers apply the
reduction for the resolved tier; items not named keep their status above.
Reductions only ever relax a requirement — workflow_overrides is the
only thing that adds one.
full— core mechanics + Logic/Integration tests + smoke check (PASS or PASS WITH WARNINGS) + QA sign-off + 3+ playtests all requiredstandard— QA sign-off + per-story test coverage → recommended; core mechanics + smoke check + playable end-to-end + 1+ documented playtest + no open S1 Critical bugs requiredminimal— smoke check + playable end-to-end + no open S1 Critical bugs required; the core-mechanics cross-check → recommended; everything else drops. Reductions relax what must exist, never what must work — a gate that closes production on "it boots" alone has not asked whether the game plays.