The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
To a large extent, it's totally subjective. As with most other forms of entertainment media, taste is everything. The various genres of games cover a vast band of different styles and experiences. It's nigh-on-impossible to compare the experience of playing Wipeout to playing Civilisation. One is a visceral thrill-fest, where the satisfaction is derived from flawlessly executing the twitch-responses required to get around the course. The other is completely at the other end of the spectrum, with speed of response being irrelevant, and the pleasure coming from strategically outmanouvering your opponents. Of course, both of these are still based 100% on the active experience of playing the game (ludology), as opposed to a more story-led effort, the Broken Sword series, Final Fantasy, MGS et al (narraotology), which opens up another branch of the gaming experience tree.
But each different style or genre has it's fans. So there must be a common element. And obviously enough, it's the fact that they're fun. So, what makes a game fun? Is there an element to the gameplaying experience that's common to all genres and styles?
I believe so. It's my belief that it all comes down to one important facet. And I believe that this facet is an implicit part of human nature. Over the millions of years of evolution of the human species, it's been human's ability to adapt, and more importantly, learn, that has led us to being top of the league table on planet Earth. Not just the ability to learn new things, but the ability to rationally apply the knowledge learnt in a myriad of ways. I believe that there's a very strong evolutionary urge in us as humans to learn new things. It would have been this thirst for knowledge and skills that led the first humans to experiment with fire and tools. It's classic Darwinist natural selection at work.
So, assuming that to be true, we have this urge to learn and master new things. The body's way of positive reinforcement (as learnt over millenia of evolution) is to release chemicals into your body that feel good, in a word, pleasure. Remember how much fun it was learning to ride a bike as a kid? Exactly. Why is taking up a new sport always so fascinating at first? It's my theory that it's a combination of this evolutionarily-installed urge to learn things, coupled with the classic learning curve. You always learn fastest when you first start something, and the rate of learning tapers off the more you do it. Let's use the analogy of tennis: the first few times you play, you very quickly go from not being able to hit the ball to being able to hit it most of the time. The more you play, the more accurate your shots get, but they improve by less and less over time, until by the time you're playing at Wimbledon, you've virtually nothing left to learn - learning curve in action.
So to summarise, as a species, we get pleasure from learning new things. So how does this apply to games? Simple. Games are the ultimate in easy-access quick-learning. They've a lifespan of 30 or so hours on average. If we apply the learning curve to that, it means that for the first 10 hours, your rate of learning is phenomenally high, and for the rest, you're applying that knowledge to a range of different situations. Now think of a game you've recently enjoyed, and re-read that last sentance back to yourself, and see if it applies to that game. I'd bet that it does. For instance, even within the first hour of playing a game, simple things like learning what the buttons do and being able to apply that knowledge to overcome the challenges in the game results in a huge rate of learning. I'll take MGS 2 as an example here. Within the first hour, you've learnt all the moves of Snake/Raiden, and have used almost every single one. This brings me neatly onto the other side of the learning/reward equation. The really satisfying element of learning new things is using that knowldge or skill to good effect. This is the body's way of telling you that the thing that you learnt is good, and not to forget it.
OK, so, we're nearly there. The attraction of games relates to their short lifespan. Within the average 30 hours, you've pretty much learnt everything there is to know, so you move onto another game, and, Bingo! You're back down at the bottom of the learning curve where the real fun is to be had again. It's clear now why it's so exciting the first time you power up a new game.
And my final point is a miracle solution to ensure that the game you're designing never gets boring. Simple, just make sure there's always a new experience around the corner for the player, and that the player is aware that that new experience is just around the corner. I'll use Civilisation to demonstrate this. At any point in the game, you know full well there'll be more things for you to do once you've achieved this or that particular civilisation advance. In this way, you're encouraged to keep on going, knowing full well that the learning curve extends on above you.
Simple innit, really?!
But each different style or genre has it's fans. So there must be a common element. And obviously enough, it's the fact that they're fun. So, what makes a game fun? Is there an element to the gameplaying experience that's common to all genres and styles?
I believe so. It's my belief that it all comes down to one important facet. And I believe that this facet is an implicit part of human nature. Over the millions of years of evolution of the human species, it's been human's ability to adapt, and more importantly, learn, that has led us to being top of the league table on planet Earth. Not just the ability to learn new things, but the ability to rationally apply the knowledge learnt in a myriad of ways. I believe that there's a very strong evolutionary urge in us as humans to learn new things. It would have been this thirst for knowledge and skills that led the first humans to experiment with fire and tools. It's classic Darwinist natural selection at work.
So, assuming that to be true, we have this urge to learn and master new things. The body's way of positive reinforcement (as learnt over millenia of evolution) is to release chemicals into your body that feel good, in a word, pleasure. Remember how much fun it was learning to ride a bike as a kid? Exactly. Why is taking up a new sport always so fascinating at first? It's my theory that it's a combination of this evolutionarily-installed urge to learn things, coupled with the classic learning curve. You always learn fastest when you first start something, and the rate of learning tapers off the more you do it. Let's use the analogy of tennis: the first few times you play, you very quickly go from not being able to hit the ball to being able to hit it most of the time. The more you play, the more accurate your shots get, but they improve by less and less over time, until by the time you're playing at Wimbledon, you've virtually nothing left to learn - learning curve in action.
So to summarise, as a species, we get pleasure from learning new things. So how does this apply to games? Simple. Games are the ultimate in easy-access quick-learning. They've a lifespan of 30 or so hours on average. If we apply the learning curve to that, it means that for the first 10 hours, your rate of learning is phenomenally high, and for the rest, you're applying that knowledge to a range of different situations. Now think of a game you've recently enjoyed, and re-read that last sentance back to yourself, and see if it applies to that game. I'd bet that it does. For instance, even within the first hour of playing a game, simple things like learning what the buttons do and being able to apply that knowledge to overcome the challenges in the game results in a huge rate of learning. I'll take MGS 2 as an example here. Within the first hour, you've learnt all the moves of Snake/Raiden, and have used almost every single one. This brings me neatly onto the other side of the learning/reward equation. The really satisfying element of learning new things is using that knowldge or skill to good effect. This is the body's way of telling you that the thing that you learnt is good, and not to forget it.
OK, so, we're nearly there. The attraction of games relates to their short lifespan. Within the average 30 hours, you've pretty much learnt everything there is to know, so you move onto another game, and, Bingo! You're back down at the bottom of the learning curve where the real fun is to be had again. It's clear now why it's so exciting the first time you power up a new game.
And my final point is a miracle solution to ensure that the game you're designing never gets boring. Simple, just make sure there's always a new experience around the corner for the player, and that the player is aware that that new experience is just around the corner. I'll use Civilisation to demonstrate this. At any point in the game, you know full well there'll be more things for you to do once you've achieved this or that particular civilisation advance. In this way, you're encouraged to keep on going, knowing full well that the learning curve extends on above you.
Simple innit, really?!
Fascinating post. I wish I could add to what you've said, but you've said it all so well.
I lik shhoting gams.
I think you pretty much hit the nail in the head there, good post.
I think you pretty much hit the nail in the head there, good post.
To a large extent, it's totally subjective. As with most other forms of entertainment media, taste is everything. The various genres of games cover a vast band of different styles and experiences. It's nigh-on-impossible to compare the experience of playing Wipeout to playing Civilisation. One is a visceral thrill-fest, where the satisfaction is derived from flawlessly executing the twitch-responses required to get around the course. The other is completely at the other end of the spectrum, with speed of response being irrelevant, and the pleasure coming from strategically outmanouvering your opponents. Of course, both of these are still based 100% on the active experience of playing the game (ludology), as opposed to a more story-led effort, the Broken Sword series, Final Fantasy, MGS et al (narraotology), which opens up another branch of the gaming experience tree.
But each different style or genre has it's fans. So there must be a common element. And obviously enough, it's the fact that they're fun. So, what makes a game fun? Is there an element to the gameplaying experience that's common to all genres and styles?
I believe so. It's my belief that it all comes down to one important facet. And I believe that this facet is an implicit part of human nature. Over the millions of years of evolution of the human species, it's been human's ability to adapt, and more importantly, learn, that has led us to being top of the league table on planet Earth. Not just the ability to learn new things, but the ability to rationally apply the knowledge learnt in a myriad of ways. I believe that there's a very strong evolutionary urge in us as humans to learn new things. It would have been this thirst for knowledge and skills that led the first humans to experiment with fire and tools. It's classic Darwinist natural selection at work.
So, assuming that to be true, we have this urge to learn and master new things. The body's way of positive reinforcement (as learnt over millenia of evolution) is to release chemicals into your body that feel good, in a word, pleasure. Remember how much fun it was learning to ride a bike as a kid? Exactly. Why is taking up a new sport always so fascinating at first? It's my theory that it's a combination of this evolutionarily-installed urge to learn things, coupled with the classic learning curve. You always learn fastest when you first start something, and the rate of learning tapers off the more you do it. Let's use the analogy of tennis: the first few times you play, you very quickly go from not being able to hit the ball to being able to hit it most of the time. The more you play, the more accurate your shots get, but they improve by less and less over time, until by the time you're playing at Wimbledon, you've virtually nothing left to learn - learning curve in action.
So to summarise, as a species, we get pleasure from learning new things. So how does this apply to games? Simple. Games are the ultimate in easy-access quick-learning. They've a lifespan of 30 or so hours on average. If we apply the learning curve to that, it means that for the first 10 hours, your rate of learning is phenomenally high, and for the rest, you're applying that knowledge to a range of different situations. Now think of a game you've recently enjoyed, and re-read that last sentance back to yourself, and see if it applies to that game. I'd bet that it does. For instance, even within the first hour of playing a game, simple things like learning what the buttons do and being able to apply that knowledge to overcome the challenges in the game results in a huge rate of learning. I'll take MGS 2 as an example here. Within the first hour, you've learnt all the moves of Snake/Raiden, and have used almost every single one. This brings me neatly onto the other side of the learning/reward equation. The really satisfying element of learning new things is using that knowldge or skill to good effect. This is the body's way of telling you that the thing that you learnt is good, and not to forget it.
OK, so, we're nearly there. The attraction of games relates to their short lifespan. Within the average 30 hours, you've pretty much learnt everything there is to know, so you move onto another game, and, Bingo! You're back down at the bottom of the learning curve where the real fun is to be had again. It's clear now why it's so exciting the first time you power up a new game.
And my final point is a miracle solution to ensure that the game you're designing never gets boring. Simple, just make sure there's always a new experience around the corner for the player, and that the player is aware that that new experience is just around the corner. I'll use Civilisation to demonstrate this. At any point in the game, you know full well there'll be more things for you to do once you've achieved this or that particular civilisation advance. In this way, you're encouraged to keep on going, knowing full well that the learning curve extends on above you.
Simple innit, really?!
But each different style or genre has it's fans. So there must be a common element. And obviously enough, it's the fact that they're fun. So, what makes a game fun? Is there an element to the gameplaying experience that's common to all genres and styles?
I believe so. It's my belief that it all comes down to one important facet. And I believe that this facet is an implicit part of human nature. Over the millions of years of evolution of the human species, it's been human's ability to adapt, and more importantly, learn, that has led us to being top of the league table on planet Earth. Not just the ability to learn new things, but the ability to rationally apply the knowledge learnt in a myriad of ways. I believe that there's a very strong evolutionary urge in us as humans to learn new things. It would have been this thirst for knowledge and skills that led the first humans to experiment with fire and tools. It's classic Darwinist natural selection at work.
So, assuming that to be true, we have this urge to learn and master new things. The body's way of positive reinforcement (as learnt over millenia of evolution) is to release chemicals into your body that feel good, in a word, pleasure. Remember how much fun it was learning to ride a bike as a kid? Exactly. Why is taking up a new sport always so fascinating at first? It's my theory that it's a combination of this evolutionarily-installed urge to learn things, coupled with the classic learning curve. You always learn fastest when you first start something, and the rate of learning tapers off the more you do it. Let's use the analogy of tennis: the first few times you play, you very quickly go from not being able to hit the ball to being able to hit it most of the time. The more you play, the more accurate your shots get, but they improve by less and less over time, until by the time you're playing at Wimbledon, you've virtually nothing left to learn - learning curve in action.
So to summarise, as a species, we get pleasure from learning new things. So how does this apply to games? Simple. Games are the ultimate in easy-access quick-learning. They've a lifespan of 30 or so hours on average. If we apply the learning curve to that, it means that for the first 10 hours, your rate of learning is phenomenally high, and for the rest, you're applying that knowledge to a range of different situations. Now think of a game you've recently enjoyed, and re-read that last sentance back to yourself, and see if it applies to that game. I'd bet that it does. For instance, even within the first hour of playing a game, simple things like learning what the buttons do and being able to apply that knowledge to overcome the challenges in the game results in a huge rate of learning. I'll take MGS 2 as an example here. Within the first hour, you've learnt all the moves of Snake/Raiden, and have used almost every single one. This brings me neatly onto the other side of the learning/reward equation. The really satisfying element of learning new things is using that knowldge or skill to good effect. This is the body's way of telling you that the thing that you learnt is good, and not to forget it.
OK, so, we're nearly there. The attraction of games relates to their short lifespan. Within the average 30 hours, you've pretty much learnt everything there is to know, so you move onto another game, and, Bingo! You're back down at the bottom of the learning curve where the real fun is to be had again. It's clear now why it's so exciting the first time you power up a new game.
And my final point is a miracle solution to ensure that the game you're designing never gets boring. Simple, just make sure there's always a new experience around the corner for the player, and that the player is aware that that new experience is just around the corner. I'll use Civilisation to demonstrate this. At any point in the game, you know full well there'll be more things for you to do once you've achieved this or that particular civilisation advance. In this way, you're encouraged to keep on going, knowing full well that the learning curve extends on above you.
Simple innit, really?!