<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>bubblegum paper on Ariel Sym</title>
		<link>https://arielsym.blog/bubblegum/</link>
		<description>Recent content in bubblegum paper on Ariel Sym</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-US</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://arielsym.blog/bubblegum/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>On Story and Design Choices in Modern Games</title>
				<link>https://arielsym.blog/bubblegum/on-game-design-2/</link>
				<pubDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<guid>https://arielsym.blog/bubblegum/on-game-design-2/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;I had been writing down game ideas for a while. Lots of text, cool art, interesting mechanics. Excellent. Very useful. The ideas usually worked until they did not. At some point the parts began to feel attached to one another instead of necessary, and I kept wondering how other games avoided that. I needed some idea of what «Story» and «Meaning» in games are in the first place. One must always understand before practicing. Or at least, I like to. How do they arrive at something that feels natural and self-sufficient, almost discovered rather than invented?&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
