Episode 28 The Player Experience

The Player Experience

Hi and welcome to Experience Points by University XP. On Experience Points we explore different ways we can learn from games. I’m your host Dave Eng from games-based learning by University XP. Find out more at www.universityxp.com

On today’s episode we’ll cover The Player Experience. The player experience is something that we all shoot for in game design. That’s because the player experience is what the player goes through when they play the game.

That experience can be as simple as gamified mechanics in gamification; a games-based learning class; a simulation; or a serious game. The player experience dictates how our creation, our game, is received by our users.

The player experience can be broken down into six major areas which include:

1. Motivation 2. Meaningful Choices 3. Balance 4. Usability 5. Aesthetics and 6. Fun

Here’s a review of these six major areas of the player experience and what it’s like to design for them.

When addressing motivation you have to ask the question: “Why is the player playing the game?” For an entertaining game it could be for the player to try something different; to escape from their everyday realities; or to satisfy their own curiosity.

For simulations; serious games; or games-based learning that motivation will be different. They could be playing as part of a class, work, or another reason that isn’t entirely clear yet.

No matter the application, we can determine that that their motivation is based on at least two different areas. Those two areas include: interest and a demonstration of competence.

Interest is the factor that applies mostly to games for entertainment. That is because the player is interested in the game and wants to be part of the experience. Demonstration of competence is different. When players demonstrate their competence they are motivated to play and do well. But they continue to play in order to improve.

This underlying motivation is important for players to return, progress, and keep playing our games. Demonstration of competence gives the player the agency to continue to improve and get better after the first play, second play, and subsequent plays. This engagement demonstrates to themselves: “I can do this. I can win.”

That demonstration of competence in player motivation doesn’t come without choice. And not just any ordinary choice. Meaningful choices are ways for players to demonstrate their competence through what they choose to do. Those choices are broken down into three different and distinct areas: agency, strategy, and tactics.

Agency is the ability for a player to make a choice. If players do not have that ability, then they cannot make a choice and a situation or simulation plays out without any player input. That isn’t good for engagement. So the availability and ability for players to make choices is important.

The impact of those choices affects both a player’s strategy and tactics. Strategy represents the player’s overall impact of their choices throughout the entire game and other opponents. Strategy represents a culmination of a series of choices that affect the game state.

Tactics, on the other hand, represent a much smaller effect. Tactics are the results of choices that affect the game state or other players for a limited duration (often for just one turn or less)

Players must exercise their agency to make decisions regardless of their strategic or tactical importance. However, the structure of those decisions is decided by the designer. Part of the impact of that structure comes from balanced design.

Balance is a tricky thing to design in games. True balance is incredibly hard to achieve and is relatively unimportant if your goal is to maximize the player experience. Though balance is important in maintaining a player’s engagement with the game through the engagement curve.

The engagement curve balances periods of high player intensity and engagement with areas of lower engagement. Having a player engage constantly can be tiring. On the other hand, not letting them engage at all would be boring.  That means that designers need to carefully balance both so that players can ideally engage in a state of flow.

Flow state is the period when a player is attempting a challenge at the height of their abilities. They are competent in the activity but they are still challenged.  Think about completing a speed run of your favorite platformer game like Super Mario Bros. You know how to play the game. You know what to expect from the game. But you still need to concentrate on all of the moves you make to play the game as fast as possible.

Success through flow ends in periods of high intensity celebration called Fiero. Fiero is the universal cultural symbol for success and achievements in challenging and difficult scenario. You’ve probably seen it before. It’s when we throw our hands up over our head in excitement. This is an excellent outcome for players because they have invested in their competency in order to earn a difficult reward.

The best games for balancing engagement are the ones that are described as “easy to learn but hard to master.” They introduce core mechanics and concepts that are easy for new players to learn and adapt to. But the challenge becomes evident through play. That play demonstrates just how deep the game can be.

Popular examples of this are Go, Poker, and Chess.  Players often spend their lives mastering.  But they wouldn’t have reached that point if the game was not playable. That is where usability comes into the player experience.

Usability addresses three questions for the players that also affects their agency in making meaningful decisions. Those questions are: 1. What is happening in the game? 2. What is happening to players? And 3. What actions can players take?

Usability addresses core mechanics of the game. Those core mechanics focus on what is happening in the game. Are points scored to win? Is it a race to the finish? Should players focus on their own success, stopping others, or a combination of both?

What is happening to other players also affects the core mechanics of the game. Roll-and-write games are accessible for their high player counts.  There are often no limits (beyond components) that would stop an unlimited number of people from playing. But in this style of game there is often no interaction between players.  Think of Bingo. None of your actions affect my actions, and vice versa.

But there are other games like Risk, Warhammer 40,000, and Cosmic Encounter where player interaction is critical. In these games everything that players can, and will do, is based on what other players do.

Lastly, the actions that players take affects the usability of the game. If I can only take actions that stop others then that game relies highly on contention. If I can take actions that help me and stop others then I have more choices. If I can take actions that help me and only the players to my left and right (i.e. Between Two Cities and 7 Wonders) then my actions are even more informed. I must think about I can do that puts me in the best position to win.

Those usability choices are informed by the mechanics the designer has included. But often those mechanics are defined through both the rulebook and play. Designing in aesthetics goes a long way towards reinforcing the usability of the game for players.

The five senses of sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell are what most people rely on to experience, interpret, and make sense of the world. Many games will only use some of these senses; but a more comprehensive approach (i.e. Nyctophobia) demonstrates what games are capable of demonstrating through sense.

Digital games can also make use of interaction through features like haptics which provide physical feedback for the player in the game environment. Table top games have yet to really advance in this area; but they do communicate much through both style and theme.

Game style and theme promote and communicate something about the player experience beginning with the box’s art. Much can be gained by just reviewing the artistic choice from the box. But more can be gained when aesthetics also inform player choice and style.

This is evident in table top games like Photosynthesis where shadows cast by trees prevent other trees from growing. This is both a design and stylistic choice that is represented by actual taller tree pieces; theme; and mechanics.

The combination of motivation, choice, balance, usability, and aesthetics, will affect much of a user’s play style. But one of the strongest underlying motivations for the player experience is fun.

Fun is subjective and something that emerges from the player experience. Game designers cannot directly design for fun. Rather, the combination of the different elements that make up the player experience can set players up for a fun time. But that fun is never guaranteed.

This is all the more true with games-based learning; simulations; and serious games where fun may not even be top design priority. Though educational applications of games here don’t necessarily need to be fun; they should remain engaging enough to have players continue to play.

You can see this in classic games-based learning designs like Oregon Trail and Typing of the Dead where fun comes from the game design. In addition to this, players continued to engage in a way that helped them reach the games’ intended learning outcomes.

Player experience can be a daunting task to design for. But understanding motivation, meaningful choices, balance, usability, and aesthetics goes a long way towards creating experiences where our players and students continue to engage.

That engagement can earn them entertainment, education, or hopefully, both.

I hope you found this episode useful. If you’d like to learn more, then a great place to start is with my free course on gamification. You can sign up for it at www.universityxp.com/gamification You can also get a full transcript of this episode including links to references in the description or show notes. Thanks for joining me!

Again, I’m your host Dave Eng from games-based learning by University XP. On Experience Points we explore different ways we can learn from games. If you liked this episode please consider commenting, sharing, and subscribing.

Subscribing is absolutely free and ensures that you’ll get the next episode of Experience Points delivered directly to you. I’d also love it if you took some time to rate the show! I live to lift others with learning. So, if you found this episode useful, consider sharing it with someone who could benefit.

Also make sure to visit University XP online at www.universityxp.com University XP is also on Twitter @University_XP and on Facebook as University XP Also, feel free to email me anytime at dave@universityxp.com Game on!

References

Alexandra, H. (2018, February 16). Super Mario Bros. Speedruns Are One Step Closer To Best Possible Time. Retrieved from https://kotaku.com/super-mario-bros-speedruns-are-one-step-closer-to-best-1823077489

Bycer, J. (2015, January 26). Player Agency: How Game Design Affects Narrative. Retrieved from https://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/JoshBycer/20150126/234961/Player_Agency_How_Game_Design_Affects_Narrative.php

Cherry, K. (2019, August 8). Achieve the 'Flow' Mindset to Get the Job Done. Retrieved from https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-flow-2794768

Ferrara, j. (2011, April 7). The Elements of Player Experience. Retrieved from https://uxmag.com/articles/the-elements-of-player-experience

Eng, D. (2019, August 6). Meaningful Choices. Retrieved from https://www.universityxp.com/blog/2019/8/6/meaningful-choices

Eng, D. (2019, July 23). Fired Up Fiero. Retrieved from https://www.universityxp.com/blog/2019/7/23/fired-up-fiero

Ellinger, B. (n.d.). Engagement Curves. Retrieved from http://www.zenrhino.org/theory/curves

Kapp, K. (2014, October 6). Game Element: Core Mechanic « Karl Kapp. Retrieved from http://karlkapp.com/game-element-core-mechanic/

Larchenko, I. (2019, February 21). Top Roll-and-Write Games: All for your games ❤✩♛. Retrieved from https://boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/86799/top-roll-and-write-games