Hot take: not every game design needs to be groundbreaking

Perhaps my most controversial opinion in our industry is that I do not think a commercial slot should be original in every possible way.

One of the biggest misconceptions about experimenting in game design is that every element of a game needs to be entirely groundbreakingly different. I don’t believe that’s necessarily true. Not because innovation is unimportant, but because successful innovation depends on balance.

At ICONIC21, we regularly experiment with new visual styles, themes and creative directions. Originality is a fundamental part of what we do. But, as an art director, I believe we need to find a balance between originality that creates excitement, and familiarity that creates confidence.

When I’m evaluating a concept, I tend to look at three things: the gameplay direction, the base theme and, crucially, the theme modifier.

The gameplay direction might be something players understand immediately. Money on reels is a good example. Coins. Values. A familiar structure. A type of experience people recognise at a glance. Within that framework, the mechanics can do something more adventurous.

“The challenge is finding the point where familiar and unfamiliar support one another”

Visually, I think about themes in much the same way.

The base theme might be mythology, Egypt or classic fantasy; something a player can recognise as soon as they hit the lobby. The modifier is where you can become more distinctive.

At ICONIC21, that means we might apply a different artistic treatment, like an unexpected tone or a surprising interpretation. As an art director, I recognise that this carries some risks. Players can explore a mechanic. They can learn a feature. They can spend a few spins deciding whether a structure makes sense to them.

But if they reject the lobby tile, the experiment is over before it begins.

So a big part of my role is finding that balance of giving people something they understand while also giving them something they have not quite seen before. To me, that is what commercial originality looks like.

Why everyone chooses the same legends

For instance, ICONIC21 recently launched Mythic Link: Monkey King, our first in a series of games inspired by Asian mythology. If we’re being honest, Asian mythology appears everywhere because, from a designer’s perspective, it’s almost impossible to resist.

Mythology and folklore are attractive source material because they arrive with characters, conflict and symbolism built in. They are recognisable across markets and carry meaning before a player has read a single word.

However, Mythic Link: Monkey King goes one step further. He is a gift to an artist because he is such a dynamic character. He moves. He transforms. He rebels. He flies through clouds, wields a staff and causes trouble in a dragon’s den. Every part of the legend contains visual energy.

That is why so many providers arrive at the same theme.

The difference between a theme and a costume

A familiar theme has value. It creates immediate recognition and reduces the amount a player needs to learn before engaging with a game.

What it cannot do is carry the entire experience. The failure mode is decoration.

We’ve all seen games where the theme feels as though it was applied after everything important was already set in stone. We get asked to simply change the symbols, swap the background and replace the character, and the same structure could support dozens of other themes.

However, I still think it is important that, as designers, we bring novelty. That does not mean adding complexity everywhere. One of the hardest creative decisions is knowing where to stop. Too little novelty feels generic. Too much novelty obscures the game underneath.

The challenge is finding the point where familiar and unfamiliar support one another.

Build the mechanic and the art together

The question I care about most is simple: what job is the theme doing?

If the answer is ‘decoration’, I think the design has a problem.

“A provider’s identity is not built from individual themes, but from the decisions that sit beneath them”

At ICONIC21, the art brief and the mechanic are developed together. We do not build a world and then search for a mechanic to place inside it. Both are solving the same creative problem.

That philosophy informed Mythic Link: Monkey King.

What interested me was not the folklore itself, but the opportunity to align theme and structure. The transformation and ascent that define the legend naturally connect with the rising tension surrounding the Hold & Win and Free Spins moments. The theme is not explaining the game after the fact, but is helping shape how those moments are delivered.

As we create more games, we’re aware that a provider’s identity is not built from individual themes, but from the decisions that sit beneath them. Over time, players and operators alike come to recognise a style of play, a way of building experiences, rather than a single release.

A competitor can choose the same folklore next week. They can paint the same clouds, the same staff and the same celestial palace.

The theme was never the difficult part. What they cannot copy quite so easily is the thing underneath.