Translating the Game Space Model from Analytic Framework to Practical Methodology for Structuring Game Development and Research

The paper adapts Howell and Stevens' nine-stage Game Space Model into a practical methodology for organising game development and practice-based research across the full lifecycle, from design philosophy through to analysis. Its central argument is that existing frameworks, such as the Design Research Methodology, the Expanded Game Experience model, and conventional pre-production, production, and post-production phases, each address only parts of the lifecycle. The authors reposition the model as an organisational scaffold rather than a rigid waterfall process: stages serve as planning and reflection checkpoints, stages are reordered (for example, Game as Expected and Game as Published move earlier), and every project is encouraged to briefly consider each stage even where the depth of inquiry varies.

The methodology was tested through a single-case study of "Where We Turn When Unwell" (WWTWU), a values-conscious, multi-format wellbeing game developed between 2021 and 2023. The evidence is qualitative, drawn from triangulated project data and the authors' dual practitioner and researcher positions. The application revealed lifecycle gaps that the framework made visible: under-attention to the Expected and Published stages coincided with lower-than-hoped player participation and audience misalignment, while the Designed and Created stages surfaced scope creep and the substantial labour of documentation. The authors conclude that the methodology works best as a breadth-first structuring tool with selective depth rather than a prescriptive process.

The authors are explicit about the limits of these findings. The approach is labour-intensive, presumes research skills and time that many agile industry teams lack, is ontologically partial, and may fit poorly with cyclical live-service or user-generated content pipelines. With only one project as evidence, generalisability remains untested, and the authors position the Game Space Methodology as a planning scaffold requiring industrial validation and adaptation rather than a universal solution.