P.S. Because I have to apply for Ph.D. in Music and Brain Science this fall, I wrote all the response in advance. Here the links to these responses:
Week 1: reading response
Week 2: reading response
Week 3: reading response
Week 4: reading response
Week 5: reading response
Week 6: reading response
Week 7: reading response
Week 8: reading response
Week 9: reading response
For this week's reading response, I would like to reflect on several design principles from the book:

3.3 Imbue Personality
I am very interested in defining personality in design with more detail. In psychology, there are multiple models to classify personality, such as MBTI and the Big Five. Imagine a world filled with moving bubbles, and you have to create INTP and ESFJ bubbles. Which parameters should I design to give them such characteristics? Perhaps for the Introvert/Extrovert dimensions, I will map it to moving velocity. For N/S (Intuition/Sensing), I will map those into the probability of using the same velocity following other bubbles. For T/F (Thinking/Feeling), it could be probably similar to the one for N/S, but this time the parameter is bubble color. A high F will add the surrounding bubbles' color to the current one, and T will probably generate colors under certain logic that is independent of the surrounding bubbles. P/J (Perceiving/Judging) could possibly be the tendency to attack (collide with) the surrounding bubbles or not.

3.4 Simplify Form and 3.5 Build Complexity from Simplicity
In my opinion, 3.4 and 3.5 should always appear together. This philosophy is quite similar to additive synthesis in sound generation. The opposite should be more reductionist, which appeals to subtractive synthesis design. If we can always make an analogy between design patterns and sound generation methodology, what will be the one that corresponds to granular synthesis? It will probably be a type of Dadaism design approach, subtracting from the existing and shuffling it in an orderly chaotic way.

3.13 Invent Artificial Constraints
My interpretation of artificial constraints in design is to import an economic system that produces scarcity. A person will quickly become bored if they can always get the same type of reward. The psychological state of desire will produce the desire (anticipation)-related hormone called dopamine(Ferreri et al, 2019). Only a system that makes people desire to reach a goal can help people secrete large amounts of dopamine. This is what I call the dopamine game.

Reference
Ferreri, L., Mas-Herrero, E., Zatorre, R. J., Ripollés, P., Gomez-Andres, A., Alicart, H., ... & Rodriguez-Fornells, A. (2019). Dopamine modulates the reward experiences elicited by music. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(9), 3793-3798.

3.16 Originality is Recombination
This principle is very obvious in the stable, diffusion-governed AI world right now. The generated new photo is sampled from the distribution of pixels from millions of pictures. Is this type of bottom-up recombination called originality? I think we should add one more prerequisite for the term originality, which is the power of deductive logic. Originality should also come with a strong causation chain in addition to the re-sampling of existing materials, just like how people prove theorems in pure mathematics research. In my opinion, game design should also require some amount of causation logic chain.