Nutmeg
Arcane
So, I was reading the /shmupg/ on 4chan's /vr/. Lots of "entertaining" content as usual, but what struck me most was the discussion that started around the question of why we play games. I wrote a rough sketch of my thoughts there, but I'll repeat here in front of a better audience.
There are 5 ways we can design, enjoy or analyze games:
I'm guessing most people here fall firmly into camp 3 to inform the actual game design (otherwise 1), but really most people here don't care much about gameplay, so really 4. is the main area of concern.
I am a camp 2 guy myself.
So what do you guys think? Did I miss anything? Did I fairly capture the spirit of this forum?
There are 5 ways we can design, enjoy or analyze games:
- As Skinner boxes. The idea here is the game should "reward" players, in a controlled manner, agnostic to the players skill, in order to get the player to continually spend their time on the game. The primary measure of success here is how much time players sink into the game, or how "addictive" the game is. Slot machines, free-to-play, and even games with other merits to them such as Diablo 2 are good examples of this approach.
- As mental exercise. Problems for the player to solve using basic motor skills, symbolic reasoning etc. The main metric here is the amount of outcome bearing decisions the player needs to make per unit of game time. Abstract games like Go and Chess, their computer offshoots in the turn based strategy genre, as well as arcade action games fit into this category.
- As pretend play. On this forum I've heard the word "simulationist" bandied about, which I think is equivalent. I guess the metric here is suspension of disbelief. Many cRPGs are designed with this in mind, Looking Glass Studios made this their explicit goal, and I've noticed it's part of the appeal of many weaker "strategy" games e.g. Crusader Kings 2.
- As artefacts of self expression. Similar to film, literature, music, art. This is the lens under which games are usually critiqued in public (sadly). I guess here what's important is the philosophical message and aesthetic spirit of the game. Very popular on this forum.
- As social experiences. What kind of social interactions the game produces. A very wide net.
I'm guessing most people here fall firmly into camp 3 to inform the actual game design (otherwise 1), but really most people here don't care much about gameplay, so really 4. is the main area of concern.
I am a camp 2 guy myself.
So what do you guys think? Did I miss anything? Did I fairly capture the spirit of this forum?