Animation Gameplay : The 5 Strategic Decisions That Shape Your Production (Part 2)
- Vanessa
- Oct 21
- 9 min read
Updated: Oct 22
A good game can survive a bug.
But not poor organization.
Last week, I talked about the technical decisions to make during preproduction.
Today: the strategic ones. The quiet decisions that seem harmless at first… but can turn a production into a nightmare 18 months down the line.
I'm not talking theory. I'm talking about what I've seen, experienced, sometimes endured , across 12 AAA productions and consulting work.
Brilliant projects collapse , not from lack of talent, but because the human and organizational foundations weren’t laid.
And since I've already met my burn-out quota (spoiler: one is enough), I'm sharing here the 5 strategic decisions that, in my opinion, make or break a gameplay animation production.
1. Scope vs Équipe/Time: The Impossible Equation
Why it's critical
“We’ll do twice as much, in half the time, with the same team.”
I’ve heard this more than once. On AAA productions.
And every time, the result was the same: burnout, sacrifices, and plummeting quality.
The scope of a project boils down to a simple equation:
Time × Team × Experience = Achievable Scope
If one factor drops, the scope must adjust. Otherwise, the team pays : in overtime, mental health, and credibility.
The ambitious project
AAA title. 15 animators: 4 gameplay, 8 cinematic, 2 facial, 1 tech director.
The ambition? Twice the size of the previous game, in half the time.
The argument: “We’ve gained experience, our tools have improved, we’ll be more efficient.”
The reality: Two years of unpaid overtime. A team on the edge of burnout.
Nothing was sacrificed in the game… except the team’s health.
I left the project in full burnout.
When I left, they estimated it would take five people to replace me. I’d been asking for help for months.
The game was excellent , but at what cost?
Red flags
🚩 "We'll do 2x more with the same resources"
🚩 Planning is set before analyzing actual workload
🚩 No buffer for unexpected issues
🚩 Overtime becomes the norm within the first 6 months
Questions to ask
What is the REAL scope based on our current resources (time, team, experience)?
Have we measured the workload before setting the schedule?
Which feature is ready to be cut first if we fall behind?
Is there a safety margin of at least 15-20% in the planning?
2. Visual Style vs Actual Resources: The Realism Trap
Why it's critical
Choosing a visual style isn’t just an artistic decision. It’s a production choice.
And sometimes, a risky bet.
Realism looks great on paper. It inspires teams, flatters ambition, shines in pitch decks.
But in real life? It’s expensive ,in time, expertise, and pipeline.
And it’s unforgiving.
Stylized games can have tons of personality with fewer constraints.
Poorly executed realism falls into the uncanny valley , that awkward space where characters look human… but not quite.
And that’s where immersion breaks.
If you don’t have the resources (people, tech, time) for AAA realism , don’t go there.
The realistic pivot
On an independent narrative project, the studio chose to move from a stylized style that had been a hit to a realistic style for their new game.
Probably to "take the next step" with Unreal Engine. But without measuring the necessary resources.
The team: 5 animators. One lead with a few years of experience, the others juniors. No validated realistic pipeline. No prototype. No senior tech to frame things.
The result was complicated. The environment is beautiful, colorful, well finished. But the characters lack fluidity. Interactions aren't always natural. The gaze and facial are a bit unsettling.
The contrast between the environment quality and character quality creates an imbalance that impacts immersion.
This project would probably have been superb in stylized. In realistic, it faces very high standards without having all the means to reach them.
It's not a question of talent. It's a question of means and preparation.
Red flags
🚩 Radical style change without evaluating necessary resources
🚩 "Unreal/Unity can do photorealism, so let's go"
🚩 Junior team on a realistic project without solid senior supervision
🚩 No validated prototype before launching full production
Questions to ask
Do we have concrete technical experience to reach this quality level?
How long does it take to produce ONE animation at the target level?
Do we have AAA references in this style and the pipeline to reach them?
Can we make a 3-animation prototype to validate feasibility BEFORE committing?
3. Team Composition: Juniors vs Seniors
Why it's critical
A team of motivated juniors can do wonders... but only if they have a framework, tools, time, and someone to validate critical decisions.
It's not a question of talent. It's a question of experience.
Experience is what allows you to anticipate pitfalls instead of falling into them.
And in gameplay animation, there are many traps: rig choices, engine logic, mocap vs keyframe, optimization, gameplay readability...
The gameplay animator profession is still young. Poorly defined. Poorly supervised.
Result: studios struggle to find the right profiles, and juniors sometimes find themselves having to decide... what they've never learned to decide.
The junior team that succeeded
Big AAA project. 100% junior gameplay team. And yet... it worked. Why?
Because several conditions were met:
The project type was adapted: narrative game where pixel-perfect reactivity wasn't critical
The team was motivated and involved: everyone really wanted to do well
There was time: the schedule wasn't tight in pre-prod, allowing for testing and iteration
There was a technical framework: experienced tech animators and gameplay programmers validated technical choices
Would it have been smoother with a senior? Yes.
Characters would have been more pleasant to control, technical choices more optimized from the start.
But for this type of project, with these conditions, it was manageable.
The lesson: A 100% junior team can work if the context is favorable. But it's not replicable across all projects.
The unbalanced team
On another realistic project, the team had 6 animators: 1 lead and 5 juniors.
Unbalanced ratio for an ambitious realistic project.
The lead did what they could, but carrying 5 juniors technically and artistically on a demanding project is too much.
The juniors progressed, but the lead was constantly called upon to validate, correct, guide.
Not enough bandwidth to handle everything: technical validation, artistic direction, individualized feedback, communication with other departments.
Result: some animations lacked polish, others were redone multiple times, and the lead was exhausted.
The lesson: A single senior can't carry everything on a complex project.
Red flags
🚩 100% junior team on a complex technical project without solid framework
🚩 One senior supervising 5+ juniors on a demanding project
🚩 Isolated junior freelancer remotely without regular validation
🚩 "We'll train on the job" without structured mentoring plan
Questions to ask
Who validates critical technical decisions (rig, mocap vs keyframe, optimization)?
Do juniors clearly know what they can decide alone and what requires validation?
Is there a concrete mentoring plan for juniors? (who, when, how?)
If a junior is blocked or uncertain, who can they turn to quickly?
4. Communication Between Studios/Teams: The Invisible Link
Why it's critical
A team spread across multiple studios can work. But only if communication is structured from the start.
Otherwise? Information doesn't flow. Decisions are made without you. And your work ends up in a "to review" folder that will never be reopened.
It's frustrating, demotivating, and directly impacts final quality.
Because without structure, even the best intentions get lost along the way.
The two-speed project
On a big AAA project, the animation team was split between two studios: 3 animators in one studio on NPCs, the rest elsewhere.
Communication? Catastrophic.
No regular meetings. Emails announcing that such-and-such feature would be cut. Us? Always the last to know.
The most striking example:
We worked several months on variations for NPCs: environmental reactions, conscious behaviors, movement diversity.
Everything was ready. Integrated. Tested.
The gameplay programming team announced they weren't implementing these animations due to lack of time to debug.
In reality, we had communicated as we went. Things were ready much earlier.
But the information didn't reach the right people, and the programmers only found out too late.
Result: our NPCs move with a single neutral walk cycle throughout the entire game.
Months of work for nothing. And immersion that could have been much richer.
This kind of situation doesn't happen through malice. It happens through absence of communication structure.
Red flags
🚩 Team spread out without communication plan defined from the start
🚩 No regular meetings between sites
🚩 Important decisions only pass through email
🚩 One site is systematically "the last informed"
Questions to ask
How does information concretely flow between studios?
Who centralizes and redistributes important decisions? (name, role, frequency)
Are there regular mandatory sync points between sites?
How do we validate that critical information has been received AND understood by everyone?
5. Role and Responsibility Distribution: Who Decides What?
Why it's critical
If no one knows who decides what, decisions don't get made. Or worse: they're made poorly, by the wrong people.
A junior shouldn't decide alone on mocap vs keyframe choice.
An animator shouldn't create their own rig if they're not a rigger.
And a project shouldn't move forward based on "we'll see."
It's not a question of trust. It's a question of competence and experience for each role.
And when responsibilities are unclear, the entire production becomes unclear.
The project without validation
A junior freelance animator remotely had to decide alone on all technical directions: mocap or keyframe, rig creation, tool choices.
Without a senior to validate, she made choices logical for her at her level... but unsuitable for the project.
Result:
A problematic rig (too many controllers, poorly managed fingers, non-functional IK/FK switch)
A keyframe approach too heavy for the scope
Months lost correcting what could have been validated upfront
She did what she could. But someone was missing to say: "Stop. We validate this before continuing."
The project where everyone decides
Conversely, on some big productions, too many people had a say on each decision.
Result:
Weeks of discussions to validate an artistic direction
Meetings where everyone talks... but no one decides
Decision paralysis that slows everyone down
On the best-organized projects, roles were clear from the start:
The animation lead validates artistic directions
The technical director validates pipeline and tool choices
Seniors validate juniors' decisions and support them
Juniors execute, propose, experiment... with a safety net
Everyone knows what they can decide alone, and what requires validation. And that changes everything.
Red flags
🚩 "We'll see who does what as we go"
🚩 A junior makes structural decisions without validation
🚩 Too many people must validate each decision (paralysis)
🚩 No one clearly knows who decides, validates, or informs
Questions to ask
Who decides on technical directions? Who validates artistic choices?
What level of decision can each role make alone?
How do we handle disagreements between departments? Who has the final word?
Are responsibilities documented and shared with the entire team?
Conclusion: What We Don't Structure Upfront, We Suffer Through in Production
These five decisions only take a few weeks.
But they shape two years of production, sometimes in pain, sometimes in clarity.
It's not talent that's missing from teams.
It's landmarks. Validations. Guardrails.
And when they're not there, we compensate with overtime, sterile meetings, or NPCs sliding through the void.
But I've also experienced productions where everything went well.
On Prince of Persia: The Lost Crown, the team was experienced, the scope realistic for time and resources, tools thought through from the start, communication fluid between departments. The team was agile and decisions were made quickly.
Result: a serene production and a quality game.
Proof that when human and organizational foundations are laid upfront, everything becomes smoother.
Pre-production isn't a playground. It's a strategic construction site.
And in gameplay animation, these foundations can't be corrected mid-course. We live them. We carry them. We suffer them... or we master them.
That's also why today, I intervene upstream, in consulting or training, to help studios make the right choices from the start.
I've seen too many projects collapse for avoidable reasons.
I've seen brilliant teams burn their wings on poorly made decisions.
I've seen juniors lose confidence because they were asked to decide what they'd never learned.
I've seen promising productions sink into organizational chaos.
And every time, the same conclusion: we could have avoided this.
Not with more budget. Not with more time. Just with the right questions asked at the right moment.
The gameplay animator profession is young, demanding, and still too unclear. My goal: reduce the gap between juniors and seniors, better structure teams, and cross-pollinate skills to prevent the same mistakes from repeating.
If you've experienced similar situations, don't hesitate to comment, I'm not the only one who's seen NPCs sliding through the void for 40 hours of gameplay 😅
Have you experienced poorly made decisions that changed everything?
Teams that held together despite it all?
I'd love to read your feedback, anecdotes, counter-examples.
Because that's also how we advance this profession, by sharing what worked... and what stung.
This is the last resource to be published for free.
Starting in November, upcoming resources will be available through subscription.
The 5 essential ones will remain freely accessible, to provide a solid foundation and allow me to keep creating expert, high-quality content for the community.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AniMatch : The beta version is now open to testers : AniMatch
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments