# Workflow: Concept Validation

## Purpose
Final validation check before committing to the concept. Ensures the idea is solid, feasible, and ready for full development.

## When to Use
- After synthesis, before handoff
- When you need confidence to proceed
- To get a final "green light" on the concept

---

## The Validation Framework

We'll validate across five dimensions:

```
                    DESIRABILITY
                         ▲
                        /|\
                       / | \
                      /  |  \
          UNIQUENESS ◄───┼───► FEASIBILITY
                      \  |  /
                       \ | /
                        \|/
                         ▼
                    MARKETABILITY
                         │
                         ▼
                    TEAM PASSION
```

---

## Step 1: Desirability Check

**Question:** Do players actually WANT this?

### Evidence Gathering
- [ ] Similar games have sold well
- [ ] Community interest in genre/theme
- [ ] Positive feedback on concept pitch
- [ ] Addresses real player desires

### Red Flags
- "I" want this vs "players" want this
- No comparable successful games
- Solving a problem players don't have
- Niche within a niche within a niche

### Score: ___/10
**Notes:** ___________

---

## Step 2: Uniqueness Check

**Question:** Is this different enough to stand out?

### Evidence Gathering
- [ ] Clear hook identified
- [ ] Hook is truly unique (not just "our version of X")
- [ ] Differentiation is meaningful to players
- [ ] Would be memorable in a crowded market

### Red Flags
- "Like X but better" (not a hook)
- Differentiation is technical, not experiential
- Would get lost in search results
- Hook requires explanation to understand

### Score: ___/10
**Notes:** ___________

---

## Step 3: Feasibility Check

**Question:** Can we actually build this?

### Evidence Gathering
- [ ] Core mechanic is technically achievable
- [ ] Team has required skills (or can acquire)
- [ ] Scope matches resources
- [ ] No unsolved technical problems blocking
- [ ] Tools and technology are available

### Red Flags
- Requires R&D for core mechanic
- Team would need to learn entirely new domain
- Scope creep is already happening
- Dependencies on uncontrollable factors

### Score: ___/10
**Notes:** ___________

---

## Step 4: Marketability Check

**Question:** Can we effectively tell people about this?

### Evidence Gathering
- [ ] Easy to explain in one sentence
- [ ] Screenshots would be compelling
- [ ] Clear genre tags for store pages
- [ ] Comparable games for positioning
- [ ] Target audience is identifiable and reachable

### Red Flags
- "You have to play it to understand"
- Visually indistinct from competitors
- Genre is confusing or unclear
- Target audience is too broad or too narrow

### Score: ___/10
**Notes:** ___________

---

## Step 5: Team Passion Check

**Question:** Are WE excited to build this?

### Evidence Gathering
- [ ] Team genuinely wants to play this game
- [ ] Excitement has lasted beyond initial idea
- [ ] Team willing to commit months/years
- [ ] Concept aligns with team values/interests
- [ ] Would be proud to release this

### Red Flags
- Excitement fading already
- Building for money/trend, not passion
- Team divided on direction
- Feels like obligation, not opportunity

### Score: ___/10
**Notes:** ___________

---

## Step 6: Calculate Validation Score

### Scoring
| Dimension | Weight | Score | Weighted |
|-----------|--------|-------|----------|
| Desirability | 25% | /10 | |
| Uniqueness | 20% | /10 | |
| Feasibility | 25% | /10 | |
| Marketability | 15% | /10 | |
| Team Passion | 15% | /10 | |
| **TOTAL** | 100% | | **/10** |

### Interpretation
| Score | Verdict | Action |
|-------|---------|--------|
| 8-10 | ✅ Strong Go | Proceed with confidence |
| 6-7.9 | ⚠️ Conditional Go | Address weak areas first |
| 4-5.9 | 🔄 Needs Work | Significant iteration needed |
| <4 | ❌ No Go | Pivot or abandon concept |

---

## Step 7: Address Weak Areas

For any dimension scoring below 6:

### Improvement Plan
| Weak Area | Current Score | Issue | Solution | New Score |
|-----------|---------------|-------|----------|-----------|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |

### Hard Questions
If validation is failing:
- Can we pivot the concept to address weaknesses?
- Is there a smaller scope that validates better?
- Are we attached to a bad idea?
- Is now the right time for this project?

---

## Step 8: Final Decision

Based on validation:

### ✅ PROCEED
- [ ] All dimensions ≥6
- [ ] Overall score ≥7
- [ ] Team aligned on direction
- [ ] Resources confirmed

**Sign off:**
- Lead: ___________ Date: ___________
- Team: ___________ Date: ___________

### 🔄 ITERATE
- Return to specific workflows to address issues
- Set deadline for re-validation

**Iteration focus:** ___________
**Re-validation date:** ___________

### ❌ PIVOT/STOP
- Document learnings
- Either pivot to new direction or shelve project

**Decision:** ___________
**Reasoning:** ___________

---

## Output

Update `_gdks-output/01-ideation/ideation-handoff.md` with:
- Validation scores
- Any conditions or concerns
- Final decision

---

## Next Steps

If validated:
1. Run `*handoff` to transition to Design Team
2. Load `@game-design-director` (Diana)
3. Begin GDD creation with `*create-gdd`

---

*Let's validate your concept across all dimensions!* ✓