Reading: Game fun

Link to pic

Hi !

This week for reading week I read a few articles on including fun into games. Sounds easy? Well its a lot more than you think.

Here is what I found.

1.http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130573/natural_funativity.php:

Here I read an article by Noah Falstien. Noah mentions that the MDA fundamentals describe WHY a game needs fun and basic fundamentals of fun describe HOW. He has a theory on how these two come hand in hand as a theory.  His boss when he started out named Steve Arnold, was originally a child psychologist. He understood the mind of a human , especially children and how to implement his games towards this. Mr Arnold knew how to scientifically form fun. Mr Falstien mentions in his introduction to this article that his boss would ask them to categorise their games into different "fun" categories. This is a mad concept for both myself and Noah as who knew you can categories something so natural as fun.

The article went on to explain this. Our instinct are primarily prehistoric. The basic human is a hunter, gatherer at heart. Mr Falstien explains that these natural instinct to survive is strong. From this we thrive for games which peak our love for fast paced, challenging and interesting things.

Through this ancestral past, we humans ,like animals, thrive for danger and a thrill. Even now people drink alcohol and eat sugar even though it is bad. We thrive off it anyway. A good game should be as if not more addictive. Not only do we thrive for a treat we also love to learn. Espessially children. This would mean we would take risks in a game and so this curiosity needs to be accounted for.

So far Noah has spoken of work and survival as fun activities and these instinct being met in a fun addictive game. But also, relaxation or fun itself, has and importance in making a good game. He explains an analogy of three prehistoric humans.

One prefers to relax, one goes out and hunts no matter what and the third likes to keep their mind busy and continuously learning but also having fun. This seems random ...its not. It links with all said above. A gamer needs to be stimulated in the way they are essentially psychologically wired. Through rewards, hard work, breaks and fun engaging tasks all through out. The two types of fun-theory and practice, learning and engaging.

2.The second article I read was http://mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm. This article is by Richard A.Bartle. Mr A.Bartle explains the four different type of gamers within MUDS. These approaches show aspects of a inter-relationships with in games.

So what does this mean?!?!?!

MUDS have been around since 1978. No matter how structured the game, its basic aim is fun!

Essentially, this whole thing came from a heated debate amongst professional players. They couldn't decide what was the best or worst aspects of the game. However, the author of the article Richard A.Bartle, has expressed there are 4 main categories of players.

A. Achievements amongst other players. Their main aim is competitiveness comes with goals and fighting to win.

B.Creating their own game. They do this by exploring the games world and figuring out how to get through it.

 C.Socialising with others. through working together in chats to pass a game

D. Completing tasks with others. Going on solo adventures in a team on screen with other users.

So whats the point? To know your audience and inter audience interactions. Essentially there are 4 main types of gamers. The social, killers , explorers and achievers. Each have their own likes and dislikes. Us as designers musty attention to this and make our games in a way that any player would like things in it. We must delve deeper into their interactions also. This is so interesting and really makes me understand how to make a game and to be smart about this.Achievers love to move past challenges and win. They can win agains killers, be killers or just love to achieve no matter what. Killers love to achieve, socialise in order to kill and win , or just solo kill on their own with no interactions. Socialisers tend to socialise with each other in order to complete their goals, could be killers in a game or task orientated groups who want to win or even individuals who talk and strategies in order to win. Finally, Explorers. Explorers love to wonder as they please. They can be competitive killers, just plain goal setters or even like to socialise as they wonder.

Within the 4 areas of player interactions , there are inter links and solo aspects of all. Just like personalities gamers also are different from person to person.

3.Finally, for my last article, I read about the specific fundamentals of MDA. Found on this website: http://www.cs.northwestern.edu/~hunicke/MDA.pdf. MDA stands for Mechanics Dynamics and Aesthetics. Aesthetics are the designs which go alongside the games story arc and characters. Each of these elements all link in with each other in order to visually give the viewer an idea of what they are playing. Secondly, Mechanics, algorithms and rules which shape the games concepts. Without these the player would have no fun figuring out the game. Thirdly, Dynamics. This is game run times, behaviours allowed, progression in the game through player inputs and out puts.

To evaluate this, a game must have rules, perfect design and other technical game elements in order for the game to progress. This is all well in good but players need to be able to move the game along themselves through the algorithms of the games.