Indie Dev Stories: Refactoring Debt Kills Prototypes Faster

Indie Dev Stories: Refactoring Debt Kills Prototypes Faster

We’ve all been there. The initial spark of a game idea, the frantic burst of coding, the sheer joy of seeing something playable emerge. But what happens when “move fast and break things” turns into "move slow and break everything"? I’ve got a story for you, a cautionary tale about a promising prototype that died an early death, strangled by its own refactoring debt. Think of it as a UX review of a development process gone wrong.

The Dream: A Roguelite Deckbuilder… with Ducks

Our team (let’s call ourselves “Quack Mechanics,” for obvious reasons) had a killer idea: a roguelite deckbuilder where you play as a duck battling bizarre monsters. The prototype was electric. Core gameplay felt great, and we had a ton of ideas for cards, enemies, and environments. Our initial “user flow” – from title screen to a basic combat encounter – was engaging.

The “Happy Path” Turns Sour

The initial user flow was smooth: Idea -> Rapid Prototype -> Core Loop Fun -> “Refactor Later.” That last step became our undoing. We were so focused on adding features – new card types, enemy abilities, a rudimentary level generation system – that we ignored the increasingly messy code.

Problem 1: Copy-Paste Catastrophe. Sound familiar? We duplicated code like crazy. Enemy AI was copy-pasted and tweaked for each enemy type. Card effects? You guessed it, copy-pasted with slight modifications. This meant that a bug fix in one enemy could take hours because we had to find and fix it in six other places.

Problem 2: Architecture? What Architecture? We lacked a basic architectural pattern. Everything was tightly coupled. Changing one small thing could break seemingly unrelated systems. Our “user flow” of development started to feel like wading through mud. The joy was gone, replaced by constant debugging.

Problem 3: Feature Creep Before Foundation. We kept adding features without addressing the underlying issues. New cards were implemented with the same copy-pasted code. We added a complex status effect system on top of spaghetti code. Each new feature made the existing problems worse.

The Critical Error: Ignoring the Warning Signs

The “user feedback” was clear: the code was a nightmare. But we rationalized. “It’s just a prototype,” we said. “We’ll refactor it later.” The problem is, “later” never comes. The codebase became so unwieldy that we dreaded working on it. The “user experience” of being a Quack Mechanic became deeply unpleasant.

The Inevitable End: Prototype Abandoned

Eventually, we hit a wall. A seemingly simple bug fix cascaded into a week-long debugging session. We realized the truth: the prototype was beyond saving. The refactoring effort required was larger than rewriting it from scratch. We scrapped it. The “user journey” ended in frustration and a dead prototype.

Lessons Learned: Building a Better Dev Experience

So, how can you avoid this fate? Here’s what we learned from our Quack Mechanics disaster:

1. Establish a Minimum Viable Architecture (MVA). Even a simple architecture is better than none. Think about how different parts of your game interact. Use basic design patterns (like the Strategy pattern or Observer pattern) to decouple components. You don’t need a complex framework, just enough structure to keep things organized.
2. Refactor Early, Refactor Often. Don’t wait until your codebase is a tangled mess. Identify areas of duplicated code or tight coupling and refactor them immediately. Even small refactorings can make a big difference. Think of it as preventative maintenance.
3. Code Journaling is Your Friend. This is where a game dev journal comes in. Document your design decisions. Track your progress. Note areas that need refactoring. A simple text file or notebook can work, but a dedicated game development log can make a huge difference. More on this later.
4. Prioritize Maintainability Over Feature Velocity (Early On). In the prototype phase, it’s tempting to just churn out features. Resist that urge. Focus on writing clean, maintainable code, even if it means slowing down the feature velocity. Your future self will thank you.

Actionable Steps: From Chaos to Control

Here’s how to put these lessons into practice:

• Start Small. Don’t try to refactor everything at once. Pick one area of your codebase and focus on cleaning it up.
• Use Version Control (Duh). Git (or your preferred VCS) is essential. Commit your changes frequently. Don’t be afraid to experiment and revert if things go wrong.
• Track Your Progress with a Game Dev Journal. This is crucial. Use a game development log to document your decisions, track your progress, and identify areas that need refactoring. Make consistent devlogs. What problems did you encounter? How did you solve them? What needs to be refactored later? This documentation will be invaluable when you revisit your code.

Stop Refactoring Debt: Start Journaling Today

The story of Quack Mechanics is a harsh reminder that “refactor later” often becomes “refactor never.” The key to avoiding this trap is to be proactive, establish a basic architecture, refactor early, and document your progress meticulously. A game dev journal isn’t just a place to write down your ideas, it’s a tool for managing complexity and preventing refactoring debt from spiraling out of control.

If you’re looking for a way to streamline your game development process, catch refactoring debt early, and stay organized, consider using a dedicated journaling tool. Try our game design journaling tool and transform your chaotic prototype into a well-architected gem. It might just save your next project.