Inside Stephen Lavelle's Philosophy — Making the Refusal to Explain Into the Work

Introduction

This time I take up Stephen Lavelle — the London-based developer known by the handle Increpare (Latin for "to rebuke"). His best-known works are PuzzleScript (2013), a free engine that lets anyone write grid-based turn puzzles, and Stephen's Sausage Roll (2016), a sokoban in which you cook sausages with a fork. On this site PuzzleScript turns up again and again as foundation, and SSR even has its own counter-review.

But what I want to study here is not the work; it is the person who made it. Lavelle is famous for saying little about his own design. That is exactly why a stay-at-home observer of people rubs his hands together. I read three of his blog posts and one interview, and use only words he actually wrote or spoke. My own conjecture is confined to the final section (Kizuki's reading).

Background — A man who ships several games a month

Since Lavelle is, in Japan at least, still known as little more than "the person who made PuzzleScript and SSR," let me introduce him briefly. Since 2004 he has released over 500 games — mostly free, and often at a rate of several per month. Between 2008 and 2014 he put out 178, and the 2016 Guinness World Records Gamer's Edition named him the "most prolific independent game developer" (Wikipedia, "Increpare").

Originally from Ireland, he moved through Dundee and Cambridge to London. In his early-2011 annual retrospective he notes, matter-of-factly, that his employer collapsed and everyone was made redundant — and that this is what pushed him fully into indie development (increpare.com, "Hey Hey Retrospective," 2011-01-02). His commercial titles include English Country Tune (2011), Stephen's Sausage Roll (2016), Hypnocult (2019) and the recent Oeuf (2026). Alongside them sits PuzzleScript (2013), an engine he opened freely to anyone (Wikipedia, ibid.).

Philosophy — Making, giving away, and not explaining

Reading across his statements, the first thing that appears is a posture of "just keep making." In his 2011 retrospective, explaining why he chose to make games full-time after losing his job, he writes that even if it went badly it would still be six months of "the most worthwhile thing I can think of doing" (increpare.com, 2011). Making is the end in itself; the work comes before the reward.

The second is that he gives most of it away for free (Wikipedia, ibid.). The third is a willingness to open his own tools to others: he introduced PuzzleScript as "a wee puzzle game engine" and released it for free (increpare.com, 2013). Make, give away, open the tools — that much can be read confidently from his own actions and words.

But the fourth is what makes Lavelle Lavelle: he almost never explains his own design. When a player asked him for "a short insight into your design process" for one of SSR's hard puzzles, he replied: "Nah I don't feel like it" (increpare.com, 2017). The much-cited virtue of SSR — "never adding anything new, yet constantly surprising you with consequences that were always there" — is in fact the language of fellow designers (see below), not a slogan Lavelle himself raised. The very core of his philosophy, I would arrange it, is the refusal to articulate a tidy philosophy at all.

Obsessions — Short experiments, in huge numbers

The recurring method is, above all, making many short experiments. His 2011 retrospective lays out dozens of game icons for a single year — from small pieces to experiments in sound and image (increpare.com, 2011). What is striking is the vocabulary he uses for his own output: in the same post he thanks the people who "suffered through playing some of my nonsense," and signs off the year resolving to "make less crap." Prolificacy and self-deprecation are written by the same hand.

Another obsession is the grid and the sokoban as foundation. PuzzleScript is a language for grid-based turn puzzles, and SSR too belongs to the sokoban lineage. But — and here I want to keep things separate — framings like "keep the verbs few" or "add no rules, dig deeper" are an aesthetic we discussed in our piece on subtractive design; I hold no record of Lavelle declaring it himself. What can be observed is the shape of the work, not a slogan from its author.

Failures and how he got past them — "They both died"

There is one failure he has stated publicly. In the 2011 retrospective he writes: "I tried starting two large projects while in full-time employment and I just couldn't put in the time to bring them anywhere and they both died" (increpare.com, 2011). A frank admission that his bigger projects stalled.

How he got past it is in the same post. The external shock of his employer's collapse handed him time. He also asked for donations on his site and, in about a week, raised roughly £4,000 — six months of living expenses, he notes with thanks. He mentions that Bennett Foddy helped him write grant applications (ibid.). After being broken by the large projects, the path he chose, one can read, was not "one big swing" but securing time and small experiments.

Dilemma — Give it away, or make a living

The dilemma Lavelle has publicly faced is this: how does a maker who gives most of his work away support himself? As noted, he writes frankly about scraping by on donations, grant applications and his redundancy pay-off (increpare.com, 2011). At the same time, he sold English Country Tune and Stephen's Sausage Roll for money.

What is interesting is his gesture toward that commerce. On the SSR store page he spells out his cut from each channel (90% on his own site, 70% on Steam) and goes out of his way to tell buyers that purchasing on Steam shrinks his share. To a buyer who fretted about the smaller cut, he replied: "70% is still ok! I wouldn't sell it if it wasn't ok" (increpare.com, 2017). The principle of giving away and the reality of selling to live — he seems to walk between them without hiding it and without strain.

Influences — What he himself acknowledges

On influences I avoid conjecture and list only what he has acknowledged. When someone noted PuzzleScript's resemblance to Tom7's "T in Y World" (a Ludum Dare 23 entry), Lavelle answered: "Yeah, I like it a lot (and did credit it)" (increpare.com, 2013). He himself reveals that the engine's idea had a precursor.

He also records the people who supported him. Besides Bennett Foddy above, Terry Cavanagh and other Cambridge indies took him in around his move and living arrangements (increpare.com, 2011). These are less "masters of his style" than people who sustained the conditions for him to keep making. As a hint of taste, in a 2011 interview he called himself a pessimist ("I won't deny my disposition as a pessimist") and said he enjoys "experimental or bizarre games" (qodemaster interview, 2011). I have found no record of him offering a systematic list of works that influenced him.

Kizuki's reading

From here is my own reading as Kizuki, a step beyond what he has said. I read this person as a designer who, by refusing to explain the meaning of his own work, hands the player full authority over discovery. The 500 freeware games, the free PuzzleScript, the curt "Nah I don't feel like it" — all look to me like expressions of a single stance: the author does not hand out answers. What he hands out is only the space and the tools for reaching them. Prolificacy is also a strategy for not loading meaning onto any single title; if one game can remain "some of my nonsense," the player can use it up without anxiety and reach a conclusion alone. A pessimist who nonetheless keeps making, every month — that silence and that volume are, I read, his most eloquent design. This, of course, is my reading, not a statement he has endorsed; let me note that once more at the end.

Closing — Where to start

To approach Lavelle, first move your own hands in PuzzleScript (puzzlescript.net) and write a tiny puzzle of a few tiles; it is the shortest way to feel his "open the tools" philosophy. From the works, brace for difficulty and try the early part of Stephen's Sausage Roll — read alongside our counter-review to see both sides of the argument. Our piece on subtractive design supplies the design-thinking context.

As a route to related designers, Alan Hazelden (Draknek) and Arvi Teikari (Hempuli), who share the PuzzleScript and sokoban lineage, sit close by. Indeed, in the SSR 10-year feature Hazelden praised it for "never adding anything new, but constantly surprising you with the consequences," and Patrick Traynor wrote, "Player. Fork. Sausage. Grill. Block. Ladder. So much comes from just these 6 objects!" (Thinky Games, 2026). The philosophy he will not voice, the designers he influenced voice for him — and that contrast draws the outline of Lavelle better than anything.

Sources

Primary sources referenced in this article:

・increpare.com, blog, "Hey Hey Retrospective," 2011-01-02 (his own account of going indie, donations, and two large projects that died)

・increpare.com, "PuzzleScript," 2013-10-06 (engine announcement; comment crediting Tom7's "T in Y World")

・increpare.com, "Stephen's Sausage Roll," 2016-04-18 (release post and comments; "Nah I don't feel like it," "70% is still ok," etc.)

・qodemaster, "Exclusive Interview with Stephen Lavelle," 2011-03-12 (his words on being a pessimist and the games he enjoys)

・Wikipedia, "Increpare" (biography, prolificacy record, commercial-release timeline)

・Thinky Games, "10 years of grilling…," 2026-04-18 (SSR 10th-anniversary feature; peers such as Hazelden and Traynor — not Lavelle's own words)