This article presents two similar design cases and a discussion of how like values resulted in dissimilar design moves. Both cases were gamified learning activities for graduate students in instructional design. Both interventions employed rapid prototyping and were delivered synchronously in an at-a-distance setting. This article compares the two designs, the two designs' similar development narratives, and the two designs' divergent features. We give special attention to the common values the designers brought to the act of designing. Contrasting crucial features in similar designs allowed us, as designers, to appreciate divergent design moves. A discussion of the two cases explains how designers arrived at different design decisions through similar rationale. The authors were both designers and instructors of the implementations; each presents their case in relation to the other. Our combined cases explore how designers might compare salient features of similar instructional interventions and appreciate design moves that one chose not to make.