Seminar Focus

The seminar centers empirical and analytical investigations of game development processes as they are enacted. We particularly welcome contributions examining design iterations, epistemic uncertainty, unknown unknowns in game development, role of precedents, inspiration and influence in game development, design decisions and design constraints, impact of technology and tools, production frameworks and materiality, and the various contextual conditions under which design and production choices emerge.

The empirical relevance of game development cases extends beyond projects that have already widely reached consumers and players. A broader understanding of development phases and realities requires attention in building praxiological understanding. In addition to studies of impactful and successful games, the seminar welcomes examinations of incomplete, stalled, pivoted, cancelled, or even sunsetted projects. Inquiries on live-operations, early access models, live-development and short-term game development practices, such as game jams are also valued.

Furthermore, we welcome contributions addressing design processes outside commercial and entertainment contexts, including artistic, hobbyist, applied, academic and non-profit game development. Research utilising analog and hybrid games—such as board games, larps, exergames, and escape rooms— development processes as an empirical ground, is also encouraged.

Critical and political–economic perspectives addressing labour, precarity, platform power, and structural conditions are welcome. At the same time, the seminar prioritizes descriptive and analytical contributions grounded in empirical material and design-oriented inquiry, rather than prescriptive frameworks or best-practice proposals. Descriptive studies are therefore explicitly encouraged over prescriptive inquiries. While broader societal implications may be discussed, they are not a requirement. That said, we invite well-contextualized empirical research employing methods such as interviews, ethnography, participant observation, diary or longitudinal studies, autoethnography, design experiments, and analyses of second-hand materials including public postmortems, design documents, developer blogs, talks, and accessible archives.

Game Design Praxiology does not seek to “fix” the industry. Instead, it aims to develop a more precise understanding of how game development unfolds in practice—and, for those interested in shaping industry trajectories, how change might be pursued by grounding the work on a more holistic understanding of the many influences and processes shaping game design outcomes.

This stems from an observation that our praxiological understanding of the overall design practices remains in its infancy. Accordingly, authors are asked to critically consider how their empirical material relates to the broader scope of the phenomenon. While we encourage early stage research and micro-study contributions, authors are encouraged to clearly situate their empiria within specific production contexts, ecosystems, and regional and temporal frames—and to avoid over generalizations. Furthermore, reflection on researcher positionality is welcome. Where appropriate, alternatives to default anonymization practices may be considered, particularly when materials are public or when identification strengthens future interpretations of the positioned studies.

Encouraged Themes

Praxiological contributions remain scattered, yet a growing body of work provides a foundation on which participants can build. Below, we outline relevant themes and topics, along with some example publications to help authors build their submissions. Proposed contributions are not limited to these themes.

Game design and production processes (e.g. Kultima et al. 2024)
Research methods for studying game development (e.g. Khaled & Barr 2023; Godin et al., 2020)
Impact of development tools and engines (e.g. Consalvo & Steined 2021)
Prototyping and sketching practices (e.g. Westecott 2020; Eladhari & Ollila 2012)
Development roles and other social factors of game development (e.g. Lassheikki 2022; Park 2023)
Game jams, and other forms of short-form development (e.g. Kultima 2021; Kultima 2015; Kankainen et al. 2019)
Case studies of particular game productions (e.g. Kultima et al., 2024)
Art, indie, hobbyist, and modding processes and cultures (e.g. Keogh 2021, Sotamaa 2010, Pelletier 2022)
Applied and serious game development contexts (e.g. Piispanen 2025; Nygren et al. 2022)
Academic game development (e.g. Morrell et al. 2023, Gómez-Maureira 2022)
Historical and regional studies of development practices (Houška 2025; Penix-Tadsen 2020)
Ethnographic accounts of game design practitioners (e.g. Kultima 2018; O’Donnell 2014)
Autoethographic accounts of game development (e.g. Tanenbaum & Tanenbaum 2014)
Game development timelines (e.g. Kultima et al., 2024; Healy & Kultima 2024)
Game design materializations (e.g. Khaled & Barr 2023a/b)
Socio-economical layers of game productions (e.g. Sotamaa & Švelch, 2021; Kerr, 2017; Rocha et al. 2025; Park 2024)

Micro-level studies — including those focused on single studios, teams, projects, roles, or decision-making episodes — are considered equally valuable.