[MUD-Dev] Fun and Learning in games

[adam at treyarch.com]

On Thu, 19 Nov 1998, Draymoor wrote:
> Ok, I've been thinking about what makes games fun for me. Specificly, Real
> Time Strategy games, but this applies everywhere I think. Anyway, the
> conclusion I came up with is that actually learning to play the game is what
> presents the greatest fun for me. I was wondering if perhaps this is true in
> other people?

I see two main types of "fun" that players enjoy from games.

One is the one you speak of, which I usually refer to as "discovery".  Ideally,
a game presents and element which looks interesting but is otherwise unknown to
the player.  There is a period of time in which they struggle to figure out
what the purpose of that element is; then they enjoy a rush of satisfaction
(and this is the "fun") as the element's secret(s) come clear to them.

The second is something I call "rhythym".  This is the place a player achieves
once they understand every (important) aspect of the action they are performing
in the game, but they take simple pleasure in performing that action
repeatedly.  Games like solitaire and Tetris fall into this category;
learning the game is not nearly as enjoyable as playing it once you have
mastered all the primary gameplay concepts.

I would say that most mudders spend their time enjoying rhythm play rather
than discovery play; that's what allows them to stay on the same mud for
many years.

I am ignoring the "fun" gleaned from social interaction, but I consider
this to be in a slightly different category because it is somewhat external
to the game itself.

> If so, then perhaps one design element that hasn't been addressed in many
> games is an unending learning curve, so there is always something new about
> the game dynamics to learn.

Which is rather difficult. There is a huge disparity between the amount of
time it takes to create a chunk of gameplay than it does for a player to
explore it all.  In fact, the only easy way to slow down players enough such
that they don't tear through everything you've created in several hours
is by inserting enough repetative (usually highly so) actions to slow them
down.  (This is true of all games, not just muds.)

Note that the games that have the longest period of functional discovery time
are those that have simple mechanics, but complex emergent gameplay.  Perhaps
the best example of this is chess.  A more recent (and applicable to muds)
example is Magic: The Gathering.  With emergent gameplay, the creator generates
huge amounts of potential discovery time by creating a few simple and
interchangable atomic mechanics.  The number of elements which emerge from
the interactions of these mechanics is exponential.

The trick, of course, is making many (most?) of these interactions meaningful
is the tricky part.  Or, in more practical terms, "Balancing open-ended
systems is a bitch."

Adam





_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev