Is this thing on?

Game Design and Tuning Workshop Orientation Marc “MAHK” LeBlanc GDC 2003

Orientation Overview Part I: Workshop Format Part II: Outline Our Formal Approach Part III: Formal Approach in Detail Part IV: Tuning

Part I: Introduction In this part we will: Explain the workshop high concept. Describe the format. Introduce the faculty.

This Workshop Is: In its third year Designed to be hands-on. Focused on the tuning process. Grounded in a formal approach to game design. Intended to be open-ended.

This Workshop Isn’t: About the game “industry.” About the game design “profession.” Concerned with the early stages of game design. A one-way street.

What You’ll be Doing Playing games. Analyzing games. Critiquing games. Modifying games. Refining games.

A Few Ground Rules Please attend the whole thing. Collaborate, Share, and Encourage. Save the “meta-discussion” for the very end.

Workshop Format Small-group activities. –Main Exercises (3) –Electives (choose 1 from 3 each day)

Introducing the Faculty Myself Rob Fermier Austin Grossman Frank Lantz Andrew Leker Steve Librande Katie Salen Tim Stellmach Also Helping Out: Art Min Robin Hunicke

Part II: A Formal Approach In this section, we present A formal framework for game design. A view of the designer-player relationship

Game Design “Frameworks” Paradigms for organizing our understanding.

Game Design “Frameworks” Paradigms for organizing our understanding. Example Frameworks: –The 400 Project –Design Patterns

Game Design “Frameworks” Paradigms for organizing our understanding. Example Frameworks: –The 400 Project –Design Patterns Separate from the process.

Our Framework Organized around the designer-player relationship. Grounded in a formal approach.

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes Book

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes Book Movie

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes Book Movie Painting

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes Book Movie Painting Chair

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes Book Movie Painting Chair Car

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes Book Movie Painting Chair Car Steak Dinner

The Designer-Player Relationship  Designer  Player Game CreatesConsumes The difference is the way that games are consumed.

An Extreme Opposite Example: A Theatrical Play The “design team” knows: Script Lighting Acoustics Seating Intermissions

Games, on the Contrary The designer doesn’t know: When will the player play? How often? For how long? Where? With Whom? And most importantly... What will happen during the game?

Obligatory Editorial This lack of predictability is the essence of play. It should be embraced, not eschewed.

A Formal Model of “Game Consumption” Rules“Fun” System Behavior

The Player-Designer Relationship, Revisited  Designer  Player Rules“Fun” System Behavior

The MDA Framework MechanicsAestheticsDynamics

Definitions Mechanics: The rules and concepts that formally specify the game-as-system.

Definitions Mechanics: The rules and concepts that formally specify the game-as-system. Dynamics: The run-time behavior of the game-as-system.

Definitions Mechanics: The rules and concepts that formally specify the game-as-system. Dynamics: The run-time behavior of the game-as-system. Aesthetics: The desirable emotional responses evoked by the game dynamics.

The Building Blocks: Formal Models No Grand Unified Theory Instead, lots of little models Models can be formulas or abstractions. We can think of models as “lenses.” Discovering new models is an ongoing process.

MDA is a “Taxonomy” for Models Knowledge of Aesthetics Knowledge of Dynamics Knowledge of Mechanics Knowledge of the interactions between them.

Properties of Good Models We want our models to be: Formal (i.e. well-defined). Abstract (i.e. widely applicable). Proven (i.e. known to work). On any given game, we expect to use several different abstractions, not one big one.

Part III: MDA in detail In this part, we discuss Aesthetics, Dynamics and Mechanics in detail.

The Player’s Perspective MechanicsAestheticsDynamics

The Designer’s Perspective MechanicsAestheticsDynamics

Understanding Aesthetics We need to get past words like “fun” and “gameplay.” What kinds of “fun” are there? How will we know a particular kind of “fun” when we see it?

Eight Kinds of “Fun”

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative Game as drama

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative Game as drama 4. Challenge Game as obstacle course

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative Game as drama 4. Challenge Game as obstacle course 5. Fellowship Game as social framework

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative Game as drama 4. Challenge Game as obstacle course 5. Fellowship Game as social framework 6. Discovery Game as uncharted territory

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative Game as drama 4. Challenge Game as obstacle course 5. Fellowship Game as social framework 6. Discovery Game as uncharted territory 7. Expression Game as self-discovery

Eight Kinds of "Fun" 1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative Game as drama 4. Challenge Game as obstacle course 5. Fellowship Game as social framework 6. Discovery Game as uncharted territory 7. Expression Game as self-discovery 8. Masochism Game as submission

Clarifying Our Aesthetics Charades is “fun.” Quake is “fun.” Final Fantasy is “fun.”

Clarifying Our Aesthetics Charades: Fellowship, Expression, Challenge Quake: Challenge, Sensation, Competition, Fantasy Final Fantasy: Fantasy, Narrative, Expression, Discovery, Challenge, Masochism Each game pursues multiple aesthetics. Again, there is no Game Unified Theory.

Clarifying Our Goals As designers, we can choose certain aesthetics as goals for our game design. We need more than a one-word definition of our goals.

What is an “Aesthetic Model?” A rigorous definition of an aesthetic goal. Serves as an “aesthetic compass.” States criteria for success as well as possible modes of failure. Some examples…

Goal: Competition Model: A game is competitive if: Players are adversaries. Players have an ongoing emotional investment in defeating each other. Some Failure Modes: A player feels that he can’t win. A player can’t measure his progress.

Goal: Realistic Flight Simulation Possible Models: Our flight dynamics are realistic if: They match a mathematical formula, or, They pass our “realism checklist,” Failure Modes: Counter-intuitive system behavior.

Goal: Drama Model: A game is dramatic if: Its central conflict creates dramatic tension. The dramatic tension builds towards a climax.

Goal: Drama Failure Modes: Lack of conflict. Lack of tension. –The conflict’s outcome is obvious (no uncertainty). –No sense of forward progress (no inevitability). Tension does not increase towards a climax. On to Dynamics...

Understanding Dynamics How can we predict and explain the behavior of the game-as-system?

Formalizing Game Dynamics Rules Input Output State (Player) (Graphics/ Sound) The “State Machine” Model Examples: Chess, Quake

Models of Game Dynamics Again, no Grand Unified Theory Instead, a collection of many Dynamic Models. Dynamics models are analytical in nature. Some examples…

Example: Random Variable This is a model of 2d6: Chance in 36 Die roll

Example: Feedback System A feedback system monitors and regulates its own state. Room Too Cold Too Hot An Ideal Thermostat Thermometer Controller Cooler Heater

Example: Operant Conditioning The player is part of the system, too! Psychology gives us models to explain and predict the player’s behavior.

Where Models Come From Analysis of existing games. Other Fields: Math, Psychology, Engineering… Our own experience. On to Mechanics...

Understanding Mechanics There’s a vast library of common game mechanics.

Examples Cards: Shuffling, Trick-Taking, Bidding Shooters: Ammunition, Spawn Points Golf: Sand Traps, Water Hazards

Mechanics vs. Dynamics We need to acknowledge mechanics and dynamics as distinct concepts. Dynamics emerge from Mechanics.

Interaction Models How do specific dynamics emerge from specific mechanics? How do specific dynamics evoke specific aesthetics?

Example: Time Pressure “Time pressure” is a dynamic. It can create dramatic tension. Various mechanics create time pressure: –Simple time limit –“Pace” monster –Depleting resource

Moving Forward… Let’s hope the future brings us: A rich aesthetic vocabulary. A eclectic library of game mechanics. A catalog of formal models: Aesthetic, Dynamic, Interaction In other words, “Formal Abstract Design Tools.”

Part IV: Tuning In this part we will: Define tuning. Present a formal approach.

What we mean by “Tuning:” Tuning is an iterative process. Test Analyze Revise

We’re not limited to: Parameter tweaking “Fiddling with knobs”

MDA in the Tuning Process Aesthetic Models help us: Articulate our goals. Point out our game’s flaws. Measure our progress. Dynamic Models help us: Pinpoint our problems. Both kinds help us: Evaluate possible revisions.

Learning From the Tuning Process Between iterations, we re-evaluate: Our goals. Our models Our assumptions. Sometimes we need to revise our own thinking as well.

The Tuning Process Before we start: Know our aesthetic goals. While we iterate: Aesthetic and dynamics models guide our way. Between Iterations Learn from the process.

Time for Coffee... After the break, go to the classroom that matches the color of your poker chip: Blue C1 Red C2 White C3

Part V: Some Common Themes Here are some themes you’ll see throughout the workshop.

Theme: Dynamics and Fantasy Our game dynamics have meaning within our game’s core fantasy. That meaning may or may not be compatible. In order to remain faithful to our subject matter, dynamics and fantasy must be in alignment.

© Steve Jackson Gameswww.sjgames.com

Theme: State Space and Design Flexibility The state space of a game is the set of possible states the system can be in. The larger the state space, the easier it is to make changes. As we modify our design, we can expect the state space to grow.