The spread of games in North America during the 20th century
could be a by-product of massive industrialization. As the work in factories
became organized and structured by the calendar and the clock, the way of life
outside work changed. By redefining the workweek, workers found themselves with
spare time that gave birth to hobbies on a large scale and the democratization
of sports, amongst others.
Moreover, with the advent of electricity, the days were suddenly longer.
Sundowner didn’t signal the end of the day anymore. In a few decades, two new
concepts appeared: evening and weekend.
Hobbies of all kinds are now so much part of our lives that even the
definition of happiness and well-being includes often a mention about leisure
activities. It is then not surprising that the production of games has become
an industry similar to the production of essential commodities.
Most of these games do more than fill spare time. They are perceived as
a learning mode: learning through play. Many games are now sold as an educative
rather than a recreational device. Many specialized companies are now producing
educational games just as useful as books in schools. Educational games are
here to stay.
We assume that these games improve learning, even though their real
impact is not well known. Researches on the precise influence of games on the
learning of school children are rather scarce and inconclusive. Nevertheless,
it is generally accepted that the subjective evaluation of educators is enough
to determine how efficient and useful these games can be in school. One thing
is sure: school children prefer to tackle a difficult concept through a game
rather than to rely solely on a traditional schoolbook. So, games can be very
useful in class, even if it only means helping to tame a concept that children
love to hate.
Can a game be educational and interesting at the same time, two
qualities that seem at the opposite ends of a continuum? That’s the challenge
facing game designers: converting a frustrating educational concept to a
captivating one. I am confident that educators are able to pick up games that
are relevant to their teaching. The aim of this paper is to try to pinpoint
factors that make a game interesting. Even the best games do not include all
those factors. Nevertheless, I am convinced that the most popular games are
based on essential elements. I wish to answer the following question: what
makes up the DNA of any interesting and challenging game?
According to Gwen Dewar Ph. D. (3), « given that a successful game player must learn to control her impulses, follow the rules, and reflect, it makes sense that gaming experience might translate into better performance on academic tasks that require focus and self-control. »
These characteristics do not show in every game and certainly not at the
same degree in all of them. The element of surprise, for instance, can be more
important in some games than others. Also, many of these characteristics can be
best represented by a continuum. The desire to make gains is counterbalanced by
the fear of loosing what has been acquired along the way. Some games let the
players accumulate as much as they are able to. But, some others have
incorporated rules that allow the lost of some assets like objects or points.
Adding more of these characteristics does not make a better or worst game in
itself.
The best games cannot be appreciated on the basis of a single characteristic. Each interesting game has its unique fingerprint and adding other characteristics might not translate into an improvement.
(1) Exhibiting rules that are clear and simple;
The best games cannot be appreciated on the basis of a single characteristic. Each interesting game has its unique fingerprint and adding other characteristics might not translate into an improvement.
(1) Exhibiting rules that are clear and simple;
(2) Making the game comprehensible and accessible to all
kinds of players;
(3) Establishing a rhythm to help players follow the
evolution of the game;
(4) Providing players the likelihood to shape outcomes
i.e. based on chance and strategy;
(5) Providing players a unique experience and;
(6) Stimulating social experience.
Even though the industry of games represents an investment of billions
of dollars and decades of innovation, very few papers have been published on
the definition of a game and its desirable characteristics. Many experts compare
games and have no difficulty ranking them. Every year they rank the games
coming on the market. But, it is not clear what criteria they are using to
compare these games. I don’t question their judgment: not at all. I would
appreciate if they listed their criteria and offer amateurs an evaluation grid.
Such a grid could be used by anybody to make his own evaluation of a particular
game and his own comparison between games.
According to Karine Gagnon (1) who wrote a doctoral thesis on the factors involved in a game, very few scientific papers have been published on these factors.
Therefore, for obvious reasons, there is a need for such a grid. First, a
list of those characteristics or qualities of a game could be identified.
Second, many of these characteristics can be measured on a rating scale that
would reflect their true nature with more precision. Lastly, such a grid would
help game designers to increase their awareness of their own intuitions.
The following list of characteristics is an effort to
increase your awareness of some of the basic elements of a game including card
games and boardgames. Over time, I hope to refine this list.
Many games allow the accumulation of objects or points. This
characteristic is much appreciated. The desire to have things is strong in all
developed countries, especially Westerners.
With the pleasure of acquiring things during a game comes the fear of
loosing them. Torn between these two poles, a player struggles with a feeling
of tension, stress. This sort of catch-22 situation brings about another
interesting quality in a game: deciding about alternatives.
During a game, the accumulation of objects or points serves to give an
up to the minute report on the state of the game and the relative position of
each player. A game has a goal, a criterion to reach. Nevertheless, from the
start to the end of the game, what fuels up interest is the competition between
players.
A game can be seen as a copy of a real life situation. A game proposes
to players to enter in a bubble where the rules are strict but simple. Once the
game is over, players get out of the bubble as if nothing had happened. A
captivating game is one where there is an optimum level of uncertainty. A game
where the result would be predictable would not be a game.
Nevertheless, many prefer games where the outcome is totally decided by
chance, the role of a dice. This is the case of Snakes & Ladders. Others
play games where their ability is the decisive factor in determining the
winner.
Most of us look for miracle solutions to our problems. So, the
possibility to make a substantial and unexpected gain brings about another
quality in a game: expectancy. But, the value of a surprise is not only a
matter of size, but also of frequency. A frequent surprise during a game is not
a surprise: it must be substantial, but rare.
Acquiring a large amount of objects or points acts also on the pace of
the game. Unexpected gains bring the players sooner than anticipated at the end of
the game. They act as boosters. A sudden jump ahead increases at the same time
the level of expectancy, the probability of winning. A game is about being the
first, the best, the richer and so on. Nobody plays a game hoping to finish
last or going bankrupt.
Significant surprises are often accompanied by small losses that are not important enough to destabilize the player or to change the course of the game.
Significant surprises are often accompanied by small losses that are not important enough to destabilize the player or to change the course of the game.
We can pretend that we play a game simply to enjoy life with significant
others. But, deep inside, we are playing to compete with them, to show
them how good we are. A game is not competitive in itself. The competition
already exists between players before the game starts.
Games are even more interesting if you feel that you don’t have a strong
grip on most situations of your daily life. Life is complex and difficult to
control. Real events come into our lives on a daily basis and many of them
jeopardize our feeling of security and control. Most games being simple and
easily manageable, we appreciate the feeling of being in total control.
Contrary to real life, games are quite permissive. Vengeance is even
legitimate, if not mandatory. The rules governing interactions between us in
real life are replaced by a smaller set of rules. What is unacceptable in real
life might become acceptable in a game.
A game is more a
battlefield
than a playground.
In any game, we become a pendulum going from satisfaction to
frustration. If you get more frustrations than satisfactions in a game, the
game will find its way in your next garage sale. Nobody plays a game to get
more frustrations than real life offers.
The satisfaction of winning is part of any game. But, loosing might not
be so hard if the game offers many opportunities to make you feel proud of your
performance all along the game. If many of your decisions during a game made you feel skillful,
loosing might not be a big deal at the end.
Games are a way to learn to deal with frustrations. In fact, games are a
replica of real life situations. A good game is the one that offers obstacles
but, at the same time, alternatives to circumvent them.
There is much more in a game than going forward on a throw of a dice.
A game must allow a player to create and apply strategies. Sure, games that are
solely based on chance can be quite popular. I believe that it is important for
a game designer to include conditions where the player will have to develop
strategies for overcoming obstacles.
A game should offer obstacles and choices for bypassing them. The player
is then faced with a decision that he will have to live with afterwards. A game
can be popular because of its complexities while another one is just as popular
because it is simple to play. Usually though, different games attract a
different group of players depending on their level of complexity. Some
players prefer strategy games while others players prefer games that are dice
driven.
A game becomes captivating if each player is continously aware the situation of the
other players at any time during the game. There is no competition without this
knowledge. Each player must be able to compare his gains and loses with the
others. The mechanics of many games, though, involve some secrecy. It can be
very interesting to somewhat guess what other players intend to do next. Poker
is a good example of such a game.
The feedback during a game can help a player choose between various
strategies. What you know about the assets of your competitors
might determine what you will decide to do next.
Some games like Chess and Checkers are, by and large, based on immediate
and continuous feedback. Your next move is dictated by your opponent’s last move. More and more, I believe that the popularity of many games is the result
of this constant feedback. So, feedback is at the basis of competition,
obviously.
We can gain points during a game. It’s a form of feedback. It is also
interesting to pile up objects, whether they are cards or chips.
First, at any age, we like to manipulate things and get them organized in a pattern of some kind. Adding points on a score sheet is not as interesting as adding three-dimensional objects on your side of the table.
Second, it provides a visual feedback to everyone.
Third, objects gained serve as a show of your strength to the other players. Many games involve using subtle psychological strategies to influence the decisions of the others.
The game critic, Trent (2), believe that the game components play a major role in a game popularity.
Jay Egger has published a convincing paper aimed at demonstrating how important it is to manipulate objects during a table game. Here is what he says about the matter:
First, at any age, we like to manipulate things and get them organized in a pattern of some kind. Adding points on a score sheet is not as interesting as adding three-dimensional objects on your side of the table.
Second, it provides a visual feedback to everyone.
Third, objects gained serve as a show of your strength to the other players. Many games involve using subtle psychological strategies to influence the decisions of the others.
The game critic, Trent (2), believe that the game components play a major role in a game popularity.
Jay Egger has published a convincing paper aimed at demonstrating how important it is to manipulate objects during a table game. Here is what he says about the matter:
« Sometimes
the best part of a boardgame is having a good excuse to play with a toy, even
if you are a 22 year old adult who has real responsibilities like paying for a
gas bill (no one warned me about that one). » Jay Egger
(4)
A game can be popular because it offers an opportunity to become increasingly
skillful. If you have a clear preference for a game, it could just be explained
by the fact that you are proficient at it. A game must make you feel better
than what you think you are. Nobody plays a game over and over if he wins only
once in a while. Nobody likes to loose and have his self-image disfigured game
after game. In a way, a game is not as fictitious as it seems: we play for
real!
A game must allow a player to boost the perception of himself: he must feel better about himself at the end than at the start of the game. In some way, a game is not as fictious as it seems: we play for real!
A game must allow a player to boost the perception of himself: he must feel better about himself at the end than at the start of the game. In some way, a game is not as fictious as it seems: we play for real!
The complexity of a game is not an all-or-none characteristic: it has
many levels from very simple to high complex. This complexity is a relative and
subjective concept. A game designer is well aware that his game will be
restricted to few enthusiastic players if his game is very complex. If your
desire is to increase the sale of your game, it seems that the simpler the
better, because more people will buy it.
When it says on the box that the game is appropriate for children, then
the consumer knows that the game is simple and manageable for adults. A game is
not better because it is simpler or more complex. Many people like to deal with
complex concepts and a high level of uncertainty. A good game is the game that
corresponds to your needs and expectations, and these can change over time.
Many experts rate the game No Thanks!, designed by Thorsten Gimmler, as one of their preferred games. In analyzing the game, we see that the rules are simple, that it is easy to learn and play, that it brings about intense interactions, that it makes you forget the world around you and that turnarounds are frequent. An exceptionnal game, to say th least ! I suggest that you look at the video made by Tom Vasel (5) to learn about the mechanics of the game.
In her research, Karine Gagnon (1) concluded that «...the more complex is a game, the less pleasure players get from it. »
Many experts rate the game No Thanks!, designed by Thorsten Gimmler, as one of their preferred games. In analyzing the game, we see that the rules are simple, that it is easy to learn and play, that it brings about intense interactions, that it makes you forget the world around you and that turnarounds are frequent. An exceptionnal game, to say th least ! I suggest that you look at the video made by Tom Vasel (5) to learn about the mechanics of the game.
In her research, Karine Gagnon (1) concluded that «...the more complex is a game, the less pleasure players get from it. »
Karine Gagnon has also concluded that turnarounds are more than welcomed in a game.
The characteristic of a turnaround in a game is different from the characteristic of surprise that is linked to chance. Turnaround pertains to the possibility of changing the course of an ongoing game because of a planned action or strategy of a player. If you have been trailing behind for some time, but your strategies allow you to get in front, then this game contains a desireable quality.
The characteristic of a turnaround in a game is different from the characteristic of surprise that is linked to chance. Turnaround pertains to the possibility of changing the course of an ongoing game because of a planned action or strategy of a player. If you have been trailing behind for some time, but your strategies allow you to get in front, then this game contains a desireable quality.
Turnaround is mostly associated with strategy games. Surprise is the main
ingredient of games based on chance and luck. Games that make use of both of
these concepts are quite interesting, and many of them do.
Unless you are playing the card game Solitaire, you are interacting with
others in a game, or rather against others. The frequency and the type of
interactions between players is one of the most important characteristics of a
game. A game is an activity between individual competing for a gain of some
sort.
If your decisions do not depend very much on the decisions of the other players, then you are playing a kind of solitary game with others. For instance, when you play Monopoly, it takes a while before events get you to interact with the other players. The first part of the game is limited to piling up acquisitions. Each player does his own thing. Gradually, in order to stay in the game, players must develop strategies and negotiate with the others.
Here is what Criffmer wrote on the subject:
If your decisions do not depend very much on the decisions of the other players, then you are playing a kind of solitary game with others. For instance, when you play Monopoly, it takes a while before events get you to interact with the other players. The first part of the game is limited to piling up acquisitions. Each player does his own thing. Gradually, in order to stay in the game, players must develop strategies and negotiate with the others.
Here is what Criffmer wrote on the subject:
« A lot of games are
criticized for being “multiplayer solitaire” or waiting games because the
players are all doing their own things and interacting very little, if at all.
» Criffmer (6).
A game is primarily a social activity.
A game is an environment on the sideline of reality. A game is a fantasy
bubble, a ferris wheel. The result of the game does not really affect the
reality of your life afterwards. For instance, while on vacation, you decide to
do something unusual. Once the vacation is over, so is the result of the
activity, unless you brake a leg doing it! A game can be seen as a vacation, a
get away from reality.
Many games facilitate this getaway by allowing a player to hide behind a fantasy figure
during the game. All of a sudden, you identify yourself as a princess, a witch,
a warrior, a violent monster or a peasant. You are then allowed to express
feelings and ideas not permitted at work. In fact, it is not only permitted,
but desirable.
Alain D’Astous & Karine Gagnon (2007) conducted a research on the factors involved in the appreciation of a boardgame. Here is their conclusion:
« The survey results revealed that the most important factor in explaining players' appreciation of a board game was the extent to which the game was able to make them fantasize and live uncommon experiences. The second factor in importance was the entertainment that is associated with playing a game. Some unexpected differences were found between male and female players. Whereas the surprise elements of a game had a positive impact on men's appreciation, they were not significant among women. In turn, the rhythm of the game had a positive effect on women's appreciation whereas it did not impact on men's appreciation. » D’Astous & Gagnon (8)
Alain D’Astous & Karine Gagnon (2007) conducted a research on the factors involved in the appreciation of a boardgame. Here is their conclusion:
« The survey results revealed that the most important factor in explaining players' appreciation of a board game was the extent to which the game was able to make them fantasize and live uncommon experiences. The second factor in importance was the entertainment that is associated with playing a game. Some unexpected differences were found between male and female players. Whereas the surprise elements of a game had a positive impact on men's appreciation, they were not significant among women. In turn, the rhythm of the game had a positive effect on women's appreciation whereas it did not impact on men's appreciation. » D’Astous & Gagnon (8)
If adults like simple games, why are they not playing games designed for
children? If the theme of a game must be fun, it
doesn’t mean that it has to be childish to be appreciated by adults. The
environment of a game must be significant for its age level. Simplicity in
itself is not enough to make a game interesting. So, the game must be about
important motivations, ideas already significant for the players.
Adults like games about exposing a murderer, building an army, becoming
rich and showing their problem solving or memorizing ability, amongst other
abilities. Becoming rich is not important for children. Still, they like to
acquire more things in the form of cards, chips and so on. The motivation could be the same, but it presents itself in a different environment.
Many games are popular across ages. It’s very important to be able to
explain why they are appreciated in such a wide spread population. Surely, the
more complex a game becomes, the less popular it will be with younger players
as compared to adults.
A game must allow a progression from the start to the end while avoiding slumps. When a player accumulates various things, his interest grows spontaneouly.
His interest grows even more when he is able to gauge at any moment his performance against the other players. In summary, gaining points or acquiring things increase the player’s motivation, but this interest is maintained simply by being able to compare his performance against the one of his opponents. Playing is competing!
A game is:
(1) A fictitious activity
(2) That establishes simple rules of execution and interactions between players;
(3) That points to a precise goal to be reached;
(4) Where luck intervenes to some degree;
(5) That produces mostly positive emotions;
(6) And which compells each player to be the first to reach the goal of the game.
According to my definition, it is not necessary that a game to be sold in an attractive box at the store to be called a game. It could very well be a spontaneous activity created by individuals not using any components. The best example is the game Hide-and-Seek played by all the children on the planet Earth.
His interest grows even more when he is able to gauge at any moment his performance against the other players. In summary, gaining points or acquiring things increase the player’s motivation, but this interest is maintained simply by being able to compare his performance against the one of his opponents. Playing is competing!
(1) A fictitious activity
(2) That establishes simple rules of execution and interactions between players;
(3) That points to a precise goal to be reached;
(4) Where luck intervenes to some degree;
(5) That produces mostly positive emotions;
(6) And which compells each player to be the first to reach the goal of the game.
So, a good game is easier said than done!
You can read many documents on the Web where a distinction is proposed between leisure, play, sport and recreation. Amy R. Hurd & Denise M Anderson (7) have analysed this concept from various angles.According to my definition, it is not necessary that a game to be sold in an attractive box at the store to be called a game. It could very well be a spontaneous activity created by individuals not using any components. The best example is the game Hide-and-Seek played by all the children on the planet Earth.
The nature of the game is not that important:
it’s how you play it.
C.
Sources
(5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuH7_X4qZuA
(7) http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/definitions-of-leisure-play-and-recreation
(8) http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/07363760710737085
(9) http://www.acrn.eu/resources/Journals/201303c.pdf
(8) http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/07363760710737085
(9) http://www.acrn.eu/resources/Journals/201303c.pdf
Aucun commentaire:
Publier un commentaire