Game Design Pitch Deck Audit

SKILL.md

---
name: game-design-pitch-deck-audit
description: Audit a video game pitch deck, publisher deck, funding deck, or investor-facing game presentation for clarity, structure, persuasiveness, visual readability, business-case completeness, and publisher-fit. Use when reviewing a pitch deck before sending to publishers, polishing a deck for meetings, checking whether the deck answers the essential questions about who, what, why, when, budget, and opportunity, or evaluating whether a deck sells both the game and the collaboration case rather than just dumping information.
---

# Game Design Pitch Deck Audit

Audit a game pitch deck as both a persuasion tool and a business-case artifact.

Use this skill to evaluate whether a game pitch deck is clear, compelling, visually readable, and properly structured for publisher or funding conversations. Focus on whether the deck makes a strong case for the team, the game, the opportunity, the ask, and the path to completion.

## Core principle

A good pitch deck does not merely describe a game.
It builds confidence in the team, sells the dream of the project, proves the work, frames the opportunity, and makes a realistic ask.

## What to produce

Generate:
1. **Deck overview** - what the deck is trying to do and for whom
2. **Structure audit** - whether the core sections are present and in a persuasive order
3. **Content audit** - strengths, gaps, and weak claims
4. **Visual/readability audit** - whether the deck is easy to follow without live narration
5. **Publisher-fit audit** - whether the deck answers the practical questions a publisher or funder will ask
6. **Recommendations** - what to cut, strengthen, reorder, or add

## Audit lenses

Audit the deck through these lenses:
- **Who** - who is making the game and why they are credible
- **Why / opportunity** - why this project exists and why now
- **What** - what the game is, what makes it stand out, and what the final vision is
- **Proof** - what already exists that proves the team can deliver
- **Business case** - comparables, target audience, monetization, market logic, and opportunity
- **Ask** - budget, timeline, platforms, scope, and what support is being requested
- **Readability** - whether the deck works when sent ahead of a meeting without narration

## Process

### 1. Define the deck context
Clarify:
- who the audience is: publisher, investor, platform, partner, grant body
- whether this deck is meant to be sent async, presented live, or both
- what stage the project is in: concept, prototype, vertical slice, production
- whether the deck is accompanied by a build, trailer, GDD, or other materials

### 2. Audit the high-level structure
Check whether the deck answers the essential questions:
- What are you making?
- Why are you making it?
- Who is making it?
- Where do you want to go?
- What do you need to get there?
- When will you get there?

Also check whether the deck roughly covers:
- team / studio credibility
- artistic why
- business why / opportunity
- dream of the game
- proof of the game
- work / systems / core loop
- market or comparables
- timeline and budget
- summary and contact info

### 3. Audit the team and credibility section
Ask:
- does the deck establish why this team should be trusted?
- does it show relevant shipped work, experience, or platform familiarity?
- is it concise, or does it waste time on irrelevant biography?
- does it explain who will actually make the game if funded?

### 4. Audit the game pitch itself
Check for three distinct functions:
- **Dream** - does the deck sell the final vision of the game?
- **Proof** - does it show prototype, vertical slice, or other non-speculative evidence?
- **Work** - does it explain how the game operates, what the core loop is, and why the game is compelling?

Ask:
- is the hook clear quickly?
- are the unique selling points obvious?
- does the deck lean into strengths strongly enough?
- does it show what is familiar and then what is unique?
- does it explain why the game matters, not just what it contains?

### 5. Audit the business case
Ask:
- does the deck explain the opportunity and target audience?
- are comparables believable and useful rather than vanity references?
- is monetization or business model clearly stated if relevant?
- is the market framing grounded, or just wishful genre enthusiasm?
- does the deck sell the collaboration case, not just the product fantasy?

### 6. Audit the ask
Check whether the deck makes a realistic ask around:
- budget
- timeline
- platforms
- release window
- build status
- support needed

Ask:
- is the budget plausible and safely scoped?
- are the timeline ratios believable?
- is the ask too low in a way that signals inexperience?
- does the deck separate development needs from broader publishing or marketing assumptions when relevant?

### 7. Audit deck usability and readability
Ask:
- does the deck work without live commentary?
- is the text readable and concise?
- are the slides overcrowded?
- does imagery carry the message effectively?
- are GIFs, videos, mockups, or key art used meaningfully?
- is the style aligned with the tone of the game?
- does the deck avoid pointless bullet sludge?

### 8. Audit submission readiness
If the deck is intended for publishers, check whether the package likely includes or references:
- a playable build
- control notes if needed
- skippable cutscenes or checkpoints if relevant to the build
- budget in practical terms
- timeline to release
- supplementary materials that help a stranger understand the project quickly

### 9. Diagnose common failure patterns
Common pitch-deck failure patterns:
- **Identity fog** - unclear what the game actually is
- **Dream without proof** - strong fantasy, weak evidence
- **Proof without dream** - lots of prototype facts, no compelling vision
- **Bio bloat** - too much team info with too little relevance
- **Market handwaving** - vague business claims with weak comparables
- **Budget naivety** - undercooked ask or unrealistic timeline
- **Narration dependency** - deck only works if someone explains everything live
- **Template autopilot** - all the right sections exist, but the deck says nothing memorable
- **Visual sludge** - unreadable, cramped, or aesthetically disconnected from the game

### 10. Convert findings into recommendations
For each issue, specify:
- **Problem**
- **Why it hurts the pitch**
- **Fix direction**
- **Priority** - critical / important / polish

## Response structure

### Deck Overview
- ...

### Structure Audit
- Present: ...
- Missing or weak: ...

### Content Audit
- Team credibility: ...
- Game hook: ...
- Proof: ...
- Business case: ...
- Ask: ...

### Visual / Readability Audit
- ...

### Publisher-Fit Audit
- ...

### Failure Patterns
- ...

### Recommendations
1. ...
2. ...
3. ...

## Fast mode
- What is the game?
- Why this team?
- Why this opportunity?
- What proof already exists?
- What is the ask?
- Would this deck still make sense if read without you in the room?

## References

Read these when useful:
- `references/pitch-deck-notes.md` for distilled deck structure and slide expectations from the templates
- `references/raw-fury-notes.md` for the Raw Fury-specific pitch expectations

## Working principle

A good pitch deck should make a stranger understand the game, trust the team, believe the opportunity, and feel the ask is grounded.