Future game 2

The second empty slot. Its contents are the same as Future game 1.

So why two

There seems no reason to hold the same thing twice. There is one.

With one slot, the assumption “there is one game” never breaks. It takes two to mean “several.”

That there is no difference between 1 and 2 is itself the evidence: nothing about either slot is special.

With only one extra slot you could end up with “1 is the real one and 2 is its copy.” Then adding a third becomes a decision again.

When the two are identical, a third grows the same way.

And this too costs almost nothing

Holding one more empty slot costs a folder and a few files.

Adding one later costs changed addresses, link repairs and code edits.

Now is nearly free and later is expensive. So it happens now.

The contents are on slot 1

The acceptance conditions for all four parts are identical, as is everything that follows.

The detailed record starts here

This one doesn’t exist either. Its parts read the same as Future game 1.

There are two slots because “more than one game” has to be visible in the structure. Leave a single empty slot and it reads as “the next game” — which still assumes a number.

Part	What this slot requires
Design	Can the way you win be written in two sentences
Spec	Do the rules fit one screen, and is the undecided part written down
Art	Has it been decided what won’t be made
QA	Can you say in one sentence what a pass means

No Client part here either. A client part attaches after code exists; the four above are what has to exist before it.

The same text appearing twice isn’t laziness — there is no evidence yet that they differ. Write down an invented difference and the first job later is deleting it.