Digital Serious Games (DSG) constitute a domain of growing socioeconomic and educational relevance, whose development, however, remains marked by the absence of a systematic and reusable methodological infrastructure. The literature evidences that the processes employed in the construction of such systems are based, for the most part, on ad hoc adaptations and on the tacit experience of the specialists involved, resulting in costly, poorly traceable developments prone to the loss of intellectual capital across projects. Faced with this gap, this work proposes the construction and evaluation of a Software Process Line for Serious Games (SPrLSG), grounded in the OdysseyProcessReuse methodology (TEIXEIRA, 2016) and the ArchToDSSA method (VASCONCELOS e WERNER, 2011), as a mechanism to manage the variability inherent to the domain and to raise the systematicity of development. The research offers four main contributions. The first is a systematic method for the comparative analysis of heterogeneous processes, which operationalizes the steps of scope delimitation, knowledge capture, element extraction, glossary definition, canonical vocabulary construction, mandatoriness analysis, and variability identification, culminating in modeling a software process line using the OdysseyProcess-FEX notation (TEIXEIRA, 2011). The second contribution is the SPrL-SG itself, constructed from nine DSG development processes identified in the academic literature, representing the domain through six canonical macrophases organized around a vocabulary that integrates roles, artifacts, subactivities, and variants. The third contribution consists of verification by instantiation, through the derivation of a process from the line based on an academic publication not included in the founding corpus, demonstrating the coverage and derivation capacity of the SPrL-SG. The fourth contribution, tied to the line’s evaluation stage, is a Process Catalog in the form of a web system, which makes the line’s artifacts available through a navigable interface, requiring no prior familiarity with the Odyssey toolset. The evaluation, conducted with six specialists by means of a survey, indicated positive results in the dimensions of clarity, completeness, and practical utility, with unanimity on the item verifying the reduction of effort in structuring new processes. The viability of configuration and derivation was recognized in terms of cost-benefit, although conditioned on the availability of supporting materials and prior training. The identified limitations point to the need for expansion of the founding process corpus, so as to incorporate industrial contexts and teams with artistic profiles, as well as to the development of assisted derivation mechanisms.