Top 5 Questions About Refactoring Prototypes Answered
The “Refactor Later” Lie
Every indie developer has heard the siren song: “I’ll just get it working, I’ll refactor later.” It’s a seductive lie, promising rapid progress, but why is it so dangerous? This seemingly innocent procrastination often leads to the dreaded “kill switch” moment. This is when your prototype’s technical debt becomes so overwhelming that making any progress feels like slogging through quicksand. The project grinds to a halt, frustration mounts, and eventually, it’s abandoned—not because the idea was bad, but because the code became unmanageable.
Smart, timely refactoring doesn’t slow prototypes down; it actually saves them. It’s about strategically integrating code maintenance throughout your development cycle, ensuring your project remains agile and viable.
Phase 1: Concept & Initial Sprout (Weeks 1-3)
Pain Point: The initial days are a whirlwind of getting anything working, but there’s a pervasive fear of “over-engineering.” You just want to see if your core idea has legs.
Mistake to Avoid: Don’t write utterly unreadable, throwaway code just to prove a concept. While speed is critical, total disregard for structure will haunt you quickly.
Actionable Advice: Focus intensely on getting your core mechanic playable and fun. This is the absolute priority. Once you have that initial spark, engage in very light, targeted refactoring. This means simple things: use consistent naming conventions for variables and functions. Break out obvious helper functions that perform a clear, isolated task. You aren’t building grand architecture yet, just making sure your immediate steps are clear.
Key Question: “Is this prototype still understandable enough for me to work on tomorrow without spending an hour deciphering my own spaghetti?” If the answer is no, take five minutes to clean up the immediate area you were just working on.
Phase 2: Feature Expansion & Feedback Loop (Weeks 4-8)
Pain Point: As you move beyond the core mechanic, adding new features feels like pulling teeth because everything seems to break existing functionality. The code begins to feel like a house of cards.
Mistake to Avoid: Bolting on entirely new systems without any thought to how they interact with or impact existing ones. This creates a tangled, interdependent mess where a change in one area ripples unexpectedly through others.
Actionable Advice: Before adding a major new feature, dedicate a small, defined chunk of time, say 1-2 hours, to refactor the affected area. Think about the single responsibility principle for your components: does each class or script do one thing and do it well? If a script is handling player movement, inventory, and combat, consider splitting those responsibilities. This pre-emptive strike makes integrating new features significantly smoother. It’s about building a stable foundation, not just stacking more bricks.
Key Question: “If I show this to a playtester and they give me feedback, will I be able to iterate on their suggestions without rewriting large portions of the game?” If the thought of iterating fills you with dread, it’s a sign you need to refactor.
To effectively track these crucial refactoring windows and your overall progress, consider maintaining a game dev journal. A consistent game development log allows you to note down decisions, pain points, and refactoring tasks, making future iterations far more efficient. This practice helps you track game development progress in a tangible way, avoiding that “where did I leave off?” feeling. For a tool designed specifically for this purpose, check out our game development journal app. It helps you organize your thoughts and keep your prototype on track.
Phase 3: Demo Polish & Vertical Slice (Weeks 9-12+)
Pain Point: You’re close to a presentable demo or vertical slice, but every minor tweak causes regressions. Bugs pop up in seemingly unrelated areas, and the codebase feels brittle and unlovable.
Mistake to Avoid: Falling into the trap of “it’s good enough for the demo.” While you need to ship, ignoring significant structural issues now means accumulating even more technical debt for the actual production phase.
Actionable Advice: At this stage, your refactoring becomes more strategic and component-focused. Identify the areas of your code that are causing the most friction or are most likely to change based on feedback. Focus on creating clear, well-defined interfaces between your systems. If your player character and enemy AI communicate in a convoluted way, streamline it. Implement automated tests for critical systems if possible – even simple ones can catch regressions. Your goal is to make the core demo experience robust and extendable, not just functional.
Key Question: “If I were to hand this codebase to another developer, could they understand and work with it without constant guidance?” This question forces you to consider the clarity and maintainability of your code from an external perspective.
The “Kill Switch” Prevention
The “refactor later” mentality is a direct path to the “kill switch.” It’s a progressive disease that slowly chokes the life out of your project. Each piece of spaghetti code, each quick fix, each ignored warning accumulates. Eventually, you reach a point where adding a new feature takes longer than starting from scratch, fixing one bug introduces three others, and the sheer mental overhead of navigating your own tangled creation becomes unbearable. This isn’t a lack of passion; it’s a consequence of unmanaged technical debt.
By integrating refactoring as a continuous, albeit small, part of your development process, you prevent this fatal buildup. You maintain momentum, keep your codebase healthy, and ensure that your passion for the game translates into actual, sustainable progress. Early, measured refactoring actually accelerates development by preventing those frustrating roadblocks and burnout-inducing debugging sessions. It ensures your prototype lives to become a full-fledged game, rather than ending up as another casualty of the “refactor later” lie.