Why would you eat, or bake bread, or explore fractally generated planets in a game. It occurs to me that there may be 2 types of gamers (just like with everything else in the world ). One type I''d call Finishers (lame, but I can''t think of another). These folks want to get thru the levels, beat the game, and move onto another. The other I''d call Escapist. They want to escape into another world for a time, and get the feel of what it''d be like to play at being a different person in a different place. If you design for Finishers, you''re going to want to put an emphasis on relevant, to the point game elements. Finishers won''t tolerate a lot of fluff. They''ll probably notice and appreciate your level''s architecture, but not all the fine little touches like the weave in the unbreakable glass or the decals on the Orc Captain''s platemail. You probably want to make things obvious and overt. Finishers probably characterize most action gamers (no matter the genre), and are particularly prevalent in multiplayer games. Their emphasis is on winning. Escapists, on the other hand, are the opposite. Envolving histories. Complex characters and setting. Subtle touches. Player actions that don''t necessarily win the game, but rather make you feel like you''re in the world. Detail is the name of the game for these folks. I''d characterize almost all Escapists as RPG or open-ended universe (Elite, Starflight) gamers. Now folks can be one type or another at different times, or just one. But it''s probably a bad idea to mix the types in your design. Finishers will space through your dialogs and conversation trees. Escapists will scream at you for not including enough content. Either way, knowing your audience type should allow you to focus your efforts in the right place. Anybody buying this? Agree, disagree? -------------------- Just waiting for the mothership...

Very insightful distinction.

*nod*
I think it''s a lot a case of mood though. Sometimes i want a fully emersive environment so i can have my hack and slash fun. How is that explained in your theory? I think the theory is more of a school of thought, yes?

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

I''m about 35% < > 40% Finishers(these damned multi games) and 75 % Escapists

I think your spot on with this Wavinator.

For me it depends on the type of game that I am playing. UO (which I just stopped playing after 3 years) was an escape for me. AoEII, I just wanted to beat the game and move on.

Knowing what percentage of players of this genre is a finisher and what part is an escaper may be helpful in the design of your game... or not. I generally don''t like poll results



Dave "Dak Lozar" Loeser

Are you positive that a game cannot mix both ? I think of a RPG where you have the evolutive kind of story we talk about and also some linear kind stories ... Kind of what they tried to do in Daggerfall with the main plot and the others. This way can focus on what interests him more.

Indeed, I think I would really like a game where the world in itself is very involved, but when combat hit, the shit would hit the fan. Or even something more broad than that, like an alternate story line for those that don''t want to wait. I think of myself more as an escapist, but I do like the occasional DM. Although, Wavy, I know what you mean about combining the two. It''s very risky business, just like combining genres.

I just thought of a good example of a game combing the two well. X-Wing. You didn''t have to do all the training missions, but if you did, you got medals. Lots of em. So I would do all the training for every ship (even the Y wing *ugh*), and by the time I beat the game, my uniform had more medals on it than the periodic table

-------------------------------------------
"What's the story with your face, son?!?"

There''s a third type:

Micromanager. This guy wants to tweak every slider, find every secret and do everything that is possible in a game. In addition, he finds out how the game works internally, maybe even makes his own modifications.

-Jussi