Gamasutra notes.

Gaming fuses design,art,audio,level,code etc. Most of the disciplines are evolving. Design however is not evolving anywhere near as fast.

A lack of vocabulary plays a significant part in this.because designers have trouble discussing design on a complex level.

The vocabulary mustbe able to describe common concepts in very different games. Formal abstract design tools are an attempt to create a framework for such vocabulary.

'design tools' is straight forward. The Formal abstract rules out terms that are too vague such as 'that is cool' the abstract rules out terms like '+2 to elves attack' since that only makes sense in the content of 1 game.

These tools are not like building blocks. You cannot add a bunch of these tools to a game to make it good. you must make sure it goes well with the experiences the game is trying to create and whether it clashes with any of the other mechanics.

Mario 64
Mario 64 gives players a lot of choice of what to do. Often stopping the player from either becoming stuck or getting bored because they are justvc waiting to find what's on the next screen.

It gives players multiple goals in each world. Often the earliest one has the player travel through most of the world showing them points that will be important in later levels as well as allowing players to learn the way around.

The game gives player very simple and consistent controls. and power-ups and similar mechanics are all consistent.

With Mario players are made to feel control and encouraged to set goals for themselves. This is as a FADT is known as intention

'INTENTION: Making an implementable plan of one's own creation in response to the current situation in the game world and one's understanding of the game play options.'

When the player performs the action and fails it is very clear why the action failed. this in FADT terms is known as perceivable consequence.

'PERCEIVABLE CONSEQUENCE: A clear reaction from the game world to the action of the player.'

RPGs often use perceivable consequence  by literally stating why a story event has occurred. sometimes however RPGs make actions that a direct results of a players actions seem random. sometimes RPGs have choices in which the consequences are perceivable but the player has no way of knowing which choice will have the negative effect. Players often dislike these circumstances.

In Mario perceivable consequence is used to reduce frustration of the player. It is best if a RPG player is given the choice to perform a action with a negative consequences rather than forcing the action upon the player.

Perceivable consequence is often sacrificed for story by giving the designer a greater control over the narrative. Story doesn't quite mean the same thing in video games as it does in books. In games the term means the narrative thread of the game. While some games have a predetermined story much in the same way as a book. Yet in sports games the narrative of the game is how the match went.

'STORY: The narrative thread, whether designer-driven or player-driven, that binds events together and drives the player forward toward completion of the game.'

Adventure games have very little perceivable consequence. The lack of perceivable consequence also allows a designer to create a much more controlled story. The two mechanics clash.

In games like final fantasy. the story is very controlled but players are given full control over combat meaning the players do not lack intention and consequence. the designers can use all three tools by not using them simultaneously.