Been trying to break down the driving desires that players look for in a game. Heres some categories i''ve picked out so far: - To learn, use & master a skill. A game operation that is rigidly set to control the players options to focus them in on improving their ability to handle the functionality of something. This is skill based drive game stimulus. - To create, explore & discover in terms of finding new means to achieve & learn in a game. A games operation allowing dynamic opoerations for the player. This is a creative based drive usually requiring self-motivation usually to explore the boundaries of the game. - To listen, observe & absorb the reactions to actions in a game. Observation of events & situations. A game heavily driven by feedback, and the players desire for feedback.

-To create somthing perfect (ie. the perfect charecter setup, the perfect simulated family/house): Very prominent in strategy online RPG''s like Diablo 2. In single player its more just to win, so the thrill dies down after a while. But online the actuall story part of the game is usually not even seen, and its just hours and hours of leveling item finding, and even reseaching. And what drives the person is nothing but the desire to make it perfect. This is why games like the sims, diablo ect. are soooo very heavily played and even after hundreds of hours (literally) of playing, there is still the drive to succeed in perfection.

-To expeiment with ideas. This one sortov ties in with my last one, being as both games i mentioned make you feel this drive heavily. In diablo 2 you start out with makeing the strongest things, you get bored, then you get ideas that you want to carry out like "i wonder how strong i could make this build, haven''t seen it done before, wonder how well it will work." With all the possiblities in diablo, it can go on forever. 7 types, 30 skills each, massive item selection with extremly verying affects, hardcore mode, level 9 pvping, regular pvping, pvm, magic finding, just SOOOOOOOOOO much to experiment with. Realy keeps you going. In the sims you want to make different kinds of houses, diffent kinds of charecters, do all the weird things you can do with them in the sims. Lots of experimenting in that one too.

- To experience a story. It may sound quaint but in fact there are a significant number of gamers out there (myself included) who like to experience a really good story, much the way they would with a book or film. The sad fact is that so few games these days actually meet that criteria with any effectiveness anymore. An RTS that has a structured campaign order does not necessarily equal "having a good story."

- To escape reality. Not as overarching as one might think. Many players (again, myself included) play games because they want to experience a setting that they could not otherwise experience. Whether that setting be fantasy, sci-fi, historical, unconventional, or even contemporary, if it is a well constructed, believable, and rich setting, and the gameplay is interesting enough to maintain their moment-to-moment interest, it can draw these players in and capture them in ways other games do not. This is about ambience, about history, about visuals, and about exploration.

Control in a powerless life and escape from the mundane. These are drivers, though perhaps not positively expressed ones. Game Architecture and Design supposes that 45 % of fun is control.

Addy

To escape reality is definatly a good one, like getting to sneak around killing people is not somthing many people experiece in their lifetime, so it is a reasonable choice to turn to a game for that. You can somwhat emulate the effect in real life with advanced versions of hide and go seek late at night but once you get older its not a very used option, but man games like that made my childhood rock. Anyway, escaping reality not only drives the players, but drives the game makers too. Game makers are allways trying to make "reality escaping games" more real fealing, Maybe someday we will get to experience what it really is like with virtual reality stuff, who knows.

quote: Original post by adventuredesign
Control in a powerless life and escape from the mundane. These are drivers, though perhaps not positively expressed ones. Game Architecture and Design supposes that 45 % of fun is control.

Addy

Hummm good point. I wonder if a game without perfect twitch control would be fun for most gamers... A physdo-real time turn based game? Would it be fun? I mean no one has control in those intervening seconds between turns...

quote: Original post by adventuredesign
Control in a powerless life and escape from the mundane. These are drivers, though perhaps not positively expressed ones.

Many people do desire greater control in their lives and probably many players find at least a temporal replacement for this control through playing games. So, I wholeheartedly agree on this point...

quote: Game Architecture and Design supposes that 45 % of fun is control.

But not so much on this one. I would say that I have just as much "fun" watching a quality film as I do playing a good game, even though I don''t actually feel much if any control when watching film. The same can be said about books -- many people enjoy a good book, and would even describe it as a "fun" experience, but they obviously don''t have any control over the story unfolding before them.

Games are interactive, and that is a necessary part of not only the fun but also the nature of the medium. However, I don''t agree that "control" in itself makes games inherently more fun than any other entertainment medium, nor do I believe that games would necessarily be LESS fun than other entertainment media if control were not a factor.

In fact, in some games the atmosphere and other elements of the "fun" are largely reliant on a lack of control -- Half Life is a prime example. While the player definitely has control over their character (which I call interactivity, not control), I would in no way say that the players feels "in control." The environment is constantly falling apart around the main character, and he is powerless to do anything but save himself. He even is forced to watch many other characters die painful or even needless deaths, because he has no control over their fate.

Brian Lacy
ForeverDream Studios

Comments? Questions? Curious?
brian@foreverdreamstudios.com

"I create. Therefore I am."

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster


Hummm good point. I wonder if a game without perfect twitch control would be fun for most gamers... A physdo-real time turn based game? Would it be fun? I mean no one has control in those intervening seconds between turns...

That sound like suspense, and it would have the simile to dramatic suspense of the feelings one has when watching a suspense film.

quote: by irbrian
In fact, in some games the atmosphere and other elements of the "fun" are largely reliant on a lack of control -- Half Life is a prime example. While the player definitely has control over their character (which I call interactivity, not control), I would in no way say that the players feels "in control." The environment is constantly falling apart around the main character, and he is powerless to do anything but save himself. He even is forced to watch many other characters die painful or even needless deaths, because he has no control over their fate.

Thats very interesting. So we are defining a variation on the depth of control. Depth meaning that every action (interaction) creates a chain of reactions. The problem being that you''ve mentioned i would say is that the players actions are not processing enough reactions to create a believable enough environment.

I guess this drive could be called ''stiring up the worms'', a pure desire to examine what happens when one does this or that.