Design Essentials: Player Considerations
Player Considerations is part-2 of the Design Essentials discussion series. The topic opens with the question of player analysis as an element for game design and works out toward identifying specific player interests and desires.
Broad View
The Question of "If"
One fundamental element in game design is player interest. It may seem an overly simple point at first blush however many games are made based primarily on other considerations. Commercial games are sometimes just clones of previous top-sellers with assumptions about player interests taken from the imitated game. A GM may create an adventure based on other ideas. The team of an indy game studio may be specifically prohibited from risking outside influences to maintain focus on an original design document.
Please note, these examples are intended to represent entirely pragmatic instances of game makers not directly weighing player wants. Marketing ploys to sell more game boxes or other schemes to dupe people are not meant to be referenced (but rants are also welcome feedback).
Player analysis for mass-distribution games is very general in comparison to face-to-face role-playing or board games which delve into personal interaction and preferences. The basic concepts are very similar; examining why a person will want to choose to spend time playing the game being designed to help make said game better.
My Own Inconsiderate Example
For one large adventure campaign I created, I couldn't take players into consideration for the first composition. Circumstances left me little choice. I was unfamiliar with the group's dynamics, accepted house rules and preferred play styles and didn't know what they would want or expect. So I set all such thought aside. Instead I based the adventure on my own interest in storytelling. Unfortunately for this instance I did not bother with any general considerations either.
As I learned from reactions to the adventure I made adjustments specific to their preferences. Still, I maintained a primary goal of improving the campaign as I envisioned the design ahead of turning it into a more typical hack-n-zap-fest. For example while I did add some action to the content I put much more effort into making an Adventure Journal to help the players track the expansive story. These things helped but didn't give the adventure the appeal I hoped to achieve. It could have been just too little too late.
Ideals from the Guide
In chapter one of Game Design: Theory & Practice (Amazon), two major questions are posed: "Why Do Players Play?" and "What Do Players Expect?". The questions are posed to give insight into how to make a game better by considering player motivations and anticipations. It is a given that good designers spend a lot of time thinking about how to make improvements and is offered as a tool to enhance the quality of that time spent.
A small aside to this discussion, Rouse (link) also uses the questions in an effort to distinguish the work of making computer games as an art. It comes across almost as an obligation to justify the classification of an art. The topic is a little out of the scope for this discussion focus and could stand its own article should a champion come forward.
"
It is by understanding what is attractive about games that other media do not offer that we can try to emphasize the differences, to differentiate our art form from others. To be successful, our games need to take these differences and play them up, exploit them to make the best gameplay experience possible.
"
Some examples offered from the text:
- Players Want ...
- a Challenge
- to Socialize
- Bragging Rights
- to Fantasize
Upon reading the material I immediately found myself wanting to rearrange the terms into a hierarchical order. For instance, 'Bragging Rights' might come under both 'Socialize' and 'Challenge' but couldn't be completely independent (in my mind). Who could one brag to without a social structure? What would be worth bragging if there were no difficulty? Questions like these made the rearrangement a bit of a puzzle in itself but was a good exercise.
- Players Wants
-
- Challenges
- Mental (puzzles, tactics)
- Physical (twitch-reflex)
- Creation (my favorite!)
- Luck (die rolling, gambling)
-
- Social Desires
- Bragging Rights
- Laughs (my other favorite!)
- Group inclusion
-
- Emotional Escape
- Fantasy
- Entertainment (passive)
- Performance (active, bands, GURPS)
In hindsight I realized that if I had made this list of general wants while making my "inconsiderate" example above I might have spotted some pitfalls in my design earlier. Creative opportunities and puzzles outweighed direct challenges by a large margin in the adventure. I didn't have a spare set of encounters at the ready to pick up the action level when needed (at first) but had story to spare. It lacked simple dungeon-crawl excitement, true lethal challenges and packed a story that was a burden to remember between sessions.
It is likely that I would not have abandoned the attempts at putting the players into my epic story with these considerations but I could have made adjustments before starting the game and alienating or boring the players.
Further Detail
Splitting Hairs
Separating "Wants" and "Expectations" may not be important for this discussion. They are split in the source material to define two instances, one for why playing a game is selected over other entertainment activities and one for after play has started. It is in support of Rouse's basic premise that computer games are an art form and speak in their own medium as mentioned above.
Select examples from the text:
- Players Expect ...
- a Consistent World
- Reasonable Solutions to Work
- Direction
- to Be Immersed
- to Fail (by their own action/choices)
- a Fair Chance
The list of Expectations also struck me as in need of reordering and even of incorporation into the Wants list. Prior to defining the meaning of each item in detail only a rough list is possible as closer analysis will certainly inspire changes. Identifying how immersion is a shade different from the desire to fantasize but still overlaps as do acceptable failure and fun challenges may be represented in a less linear format.
Consistent World >> Reasonable Solutions + Fair Chance1 + Acceptable Failure1
|
Direction <-> Freedom of Action
|
Immersion >> Able to Fantasize >> Able to Escape / Relax
|
Challenge >> Fair Chance2 + Acceptable Failure2
Indefinite Conclusion
Awareness of what attracts a person to play and what may satisfy or frustrate a player while playing is a good trait for game design. It can help both the big projects and the guy making a dungeon crawl for his game-night crew. Rouse concludes his chapter on the subject by calling answers to the questions "A Never-Ending List". I hope it leads us to a never-ending discussion.
- Question Suggestions
- What would you add to the reasons players play?
- Why do you yourself or your players play?
- How would your list or lists appear?
- What other ideas or views do you have on player analysis?
----
old edition info:
Game Design: Theory & Practice
by Richard Rouse III ; illustrations by Steve Ogden
ISBN 1-55622-735-3 (pbk.)
(c) 2001, Wordware Publishing, Inc.
----
- Login to post comments
Unfortunately, I have no real strong opinions abot the topics, but I am suffering a bout of insomnia and I hate when there are no responses to my own articles, so here goes:
>Players Wants
>Challenges
The area of providing challenges is especially difficult for RPGs. For boardgames, the competitive nature provides much of it's own challenge whereas the (generally) cooperative nature of RPGs means all the challenge must come from the GM.
>Mental (puzzles, tactics)
I believe that is is the most crucial aspect of challenge for games. Novelty goes a long way toward this.
Puzzles: Using the newspaper as an example, for decades almost every newspaper has printed a daily crossword puzzle. Now, the newer sudoku is taking the country by storm. Not because the puzzles are easier or harder, but because they are different. The novelty has attraction. The Board game Clue is a puzzle game, but after 50 or so plays loses all novelty and becomes more of an algorithm exercise than a true puzzle.
Unfortunately puzzles are hard to incorporate into RPGs, because a puzzle thought to be simple by the GM might kick the brain of the one or two players that care about puzzles, and then everyone is annoyed and bored.
On a side note: If puzzles are your thing, BTW I strongly recommend Conceptistech.com, which features about 40 puzzles a week in a half dozen styles, all solvable with logic (I especially like Hatori puzzles) and also Tanga.com, which has a 'different' puzzle each and every day.
Tactics: While every melee for mini using RPers is a tactical challenge, the players who truly love this sort of thing migrate towards the minis games and maintainng a constant stream of tactical challenge might as well be a minis game.
Social Challenge: I think this is the area that most RPers fall into. I speak not of the challenge of working with one another, but of interacting with the NPCs. How to get Lord Highandmighty to invite Mr Plotoint to the ball, so he can impress Lady Romanticinterest and so forth.
For my own experience, I am trying to shift from tactical to social challenges in my games.
>Physical (twitch-reflex)
This is not genarally a large part of RPGs or board games although there are notable exceptions. Pick-up sticks, and Operation are classic examples and more modern ones include Carabande (being published under a new name that I cannot recall) and Elkenfest (RioGrande). Even Wargaming had Diskwars where the arrows were dropped from a foot above the table and what the landed on they hit. I am aware of some Larps using RockScissorPaper to resolve contests meaning even RP can include physical challenge, though I suspect many gamers are drawn to RP becasue of lack of physical requirements.
>Creation (my favorite!)
Largely this aspect of challenge falls to the GM who must create a new adventure each session and appeal to the puzzle/tactic/socail desires of the players. Whereas the player aspect of this resides largely in munchkinizing their heroes. I do not wish to discredit those players who put hours of thought and forests of paper into their characters and backgrounds, but that is generally much less often than the GMs portion.
>Luck (die rolling, gambling)
I would argue against luck being a challenge. No amount of practice will improve your die rolls or roullette ball landings. Gambling is either a puzzle (poker) or a lottery (most everyhting else).
>Social Desires
The definition of what is social is of some importance here, I think. While online electrinic games might involve talking/working with someone unknown to you. I would argue against is being categorized as social. It is rather just a part of the tactical challenge. Similarly, I would say that I am not social with 90% of the people I deal with at my job as I know little about them outside work. The people I boardgame and RP with, on the otherhand I generally know much more about becasue the social part of the game is not limited to the game. The exception here would be convention events where the game is the thing rather than people, although this has just given me some insight into my own social behavior.
>Bragging Rights
With online and other electronic gaming, the universality and commonality of each game gives a standard for bragging. Scoring 12 bajillion points on pacman means something becasue each pacman was the same. Defeating Diablo II Hell level in X hours means something to others that have accomplished the same task. In the olden days of relativel few published modules, comparison between groups was possible, but seldom is any longer. Some few boardgames give bragging right to those who are willing to pursue tose games on high levels, but I suspect the National Scrabble Champion gets a lot of guff from his/her RP group when they botch a roll. THe rights don't really extend outside the game in question and few care sufficiently for even that to mean anything.
>Laughs (my other favorite!)
If it woren't for the laughs, it's be called Role Playing Work and we's all get paid, but not enough.
>Group inclusion
This is interesting to me. I've often said that gamers are the most diverse group, becasue wierdness is accepted. While extensive wierdness might get one dis-invited, generally gamers are not offended by eccentricities (except thos regarding poor personal hygiene).
>Emotional Escape
>Fantasy
>Entertainment (passive)
>Performance (active, bands, GURPS)
While I certainly think that this is important, I do not think it is exclusively (or even close) the domain of gaming. Movies, TV, Sports, drugs, alcohol and a plethora of other things offer this with varying degrees of passivity and activity for the individual.
Unfortunately, I have no real strong opinions abot the topics, but I am suffering a bout of insomnia and I hate when there are no responses to my own articles, so here goes:
I appreciate the effort -- it is like an early Christmas gift. Thanks.
It is a tough topic during a tough time of year schedule-wise. Maybe it would be good time to mention that I'm open and welcoming to alternate articles on the same topics. I certainly don't own any of this and more articles to read is a good thing.
But on to the good stuff ...
>Players Wants
>Challenges
The area of providing challenges is especially difficult for RPGs. For boardgames, the competitive nature provides much of it's own challenge whereas the (generally) cooperative nature of RPGs means all the challenge must come from the GM.
This touches on a depth I didn't think of until now. Pitting players against one another to create challenges can be very risky except maybe for groups you know very well. Maybe that is just my impression. Anyone have some input?
Excellent tips and side-notes by the way. You are a regular treasure trove of ideas. I'll be checking them all out. Would you like to do an interview for my next topic?
For my own experience, I am trying to shift from tactical to social challenges in my games.
I'm curious if the shift entails shifting the player styles as well. Getting number-crunchers to engage in the social aspects would make an awesome tutorial or three.
>Laughs (my other favorite!)
If it weren't for the laughs, it's be called Role Playing Work and we'd all get paid, but not enough.
*Laugh* I'll second that!
I had a couple players take a situation I'd set up and go wild. Being the GM I could see everything coming sooner than the remaining players and they had me in tears I was laughing so hard. Not my best GM-face to say the least, but one of my favorite all-time sessions.
You've hit the nail on the head. It is a great article that should spark lots of conversation. I'd guess that everyone is really busy right now. We are out there. We do want to comment.
What would you add to the reasons players play?
Players also play to explore the moral attitudes of those around them. Before you dismiss this as too grandiose for general inclusion in the average gaming group, watch a group of children play. They are entirely fascinated by the reactions of parents and authority figures to these very questions. In a role-playing game we are able to alter the moral landscape, change cultural mores, and integrate abberant characters into the close social circles of the players. They way that they respond to this alternate morals is partly escape, partly an act of social discovery, and partly a challenge to retain their own moral direction.
Why do you yourself or your players play?
As a GM I enjoy the experiment. My challenge is to make the players feel real fear, real joy, and real despair. I love to make them confront their own evil and triumph over it. I love to make them think about people and situations in a different way. I like to have them laugh and win.
What other ideas or views do you have on player analysis?
* Players Wants
o Challenges Mental (puzzles, tactics)
o Physical (twitch-reflex)
o Creation (my favorite!)
o Luck (die rolling, gambling)
*
o Social Desires Bragging Rights
o Laughs (my other favorite!)
o Group inclusion
*
o Emotional Escape Fantasy
o Entertainment (passive)
o Performance (active, bands, GURPS)
Most gaming systems give players reward according to a universal yardstick. This makes the game homogenous as all characters and all roles are given rewards according to the same formula. Although the characters would find personal reward in different avenues, the players are judged according to the same formula. In our example above we have listed lots of reasons that players play, yet the success of their characters is not based on the same list. Hence, I feel the need to give you an example that changes the general trend.
As a martial artist I don't only improve when I win a fight. Sometimes loosing a fight to a technique or deficiency makes me train harder, reflect more, and come back with an answer. That is the process of growth -- a question and an answer. No questions means no improvement.
In Epic Fantasy Role Playing each character has an advancement profile that is divided between ( Alertness, Daring, Insight, Volition, and Artistry ). These separations also translate into skill groupings; while membership in guilds, orders, etc. determines which skills they can discover and practice.
There is one very important thing about this model. The goal of the "wizard" character at the table may be to use Insight and Artistry while the "mercenary" needs to show Daring and Alertness. The interdynamic of the group is solidified by their difference. This creates the right kind of internal conflict in a group. The members of the group are not only looking at the final outcome of the story, but how they develop their character on the way.
These two aspects -- Story and character development -- replace money and slaughter in D&D and victory conditions in more sophisticated games like GURPS.
Got to go ... MERRY CHRISTMAS!!
You've hit the nail on the head ... I'd guess that everyone is really busy right now. We are out there. We do want to comment.
Thanks for the good thoughts. This is definitely all on the long-term plan. You may be familiar with the "ripening" strategy; write something out an let it sit and ripen, even if it is just for yourself.
Players also play to explore the moral attitudes of those around them.
Good addition. It really sparks the "and speaking of ..." ideas. People of all sorts of personality types test and temper others playfully (*scribbles notes to self*).
As a GM I enjoy the experiment. My challenge is to make the players feel real fear, real joy, and real despair. I love to make them confront their own evil and triumph over it. I love to make them think about people and situations in a different way. I like to have them laugh and win.
This should go into the forward of the Gamegrene Guide to GMing. We are writing that right?
Most gaming systems give players reward according to a universal yardstick ... As a martial artist I don't only improve when I win a fight.
This is a personal favorite of mine from when I was going to MMOG-enthusiast to jaded MMOG-burnout. I wish I recall where I first stumbled across the idea. Maybe it was here, who knows!
These two aspects -- Story and character development -- replace money and slaughter in D&D and victory conditions in more sophisticated games like GURPS.
I'm going to have to explore GURPS one of these days. Next year. heh.
Got to go ... MERRY CHRISTMAS!!
Et tu Gilgamesh!