LOADING...
Pinned
Deleted
Locked
- Posts: 187
- Threads: 28
- Joined: 2025 Jun
2025-12-08(Mon)12:10:07
No.
114
<section>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NC0sW-t6oY
Putting up another video from MatthewMatosis for transcription purposes.<span class="post-quote">
>This video presents theories about general game design concepts.</span><span class="post-quote">
>It’s not meant to prescribe a set of ideals which all games must follow.</span><span class="post-quote">
>However valuable any guideline might be, it’s always (or almost always) possible to imagine a game which is made better by ignoring such considerations.</span><span class="post-quote">
>A great game cannot necessarily be made just by applying a set of principles.</span></section>
- Posts: 187
- Threads: 28
- Joined: 2025 Jun
2025-12-08(Mon)12:13:26
No.
115
<section><span class="post-quote"><a class="post-backlink" href="#114">>>114</a></span>
00:00
When we think about single-player games, it can be useful to picture the interactivity which occurs between the player and the computer. The player feeds the computer inputs, by moving some body part, while the computer feeds the player outputs in the form of audio-visual information. These two types of communication form a feedback loop, which can provide innate enjoyment all by itself. That said, the surface level of the feedback loop is clearly not the purpose of the game, otherwise it could be automated with a mechanical button-presser.
A player's job is not merely to provide inputs, and enjoyment is not merely derived from seeing those inputs registered on screen. Instead, it might be more useful to say that a player brings their "desires" into the feedback loop. Inputs are a means to those desires. The jump button is pushed in time to avoid a fall. The attack button is pushed in order to destroy an enemy. Naturally, players need a reason to take any action at all, and therefore "motivation" is what the game provides: pitfalls appear to provoke a jump; enemies appear to provoke an attack. Of course, a pair of words will never truly sum up this complex interaction, but "desire" and "motivation" seem like a reasonable enough summary. Generally speaking, the fundamental "input-output" loop is how it feels to watch someone else play a game, whereas the "desire-motivation" loop is how it feels to actually play a game.
Generally speaking, programmers concern themselves with the input-output loop, whereas game designers care more about the desire-motivation loop. The latter loop is built on top of the former, so even for game designers, it's vital to remember that information can only flow through the provided channels. All of the internal game data is ultimately conveyed via different wavelengths of light and sound, which are then reconstructed in the player's mind. A player sees a miniature world because they're capable of interpreting audio-visual cues correctly. Without that interpretive ability, the outputs seem meaningless. If that sounds outlandish, just picture an animal, alien, or artificial intelligence staring at a game designed for human consumption. It's not hard to imagine them being perplexed by the display.
Supposing it one day becomes possible to connect players more DIRECTLY to games, it might be the case that audio-visual communication is no longer necessary. Hypothetically, a game might send signals which directly stimulate a player's mind in such a way as to cause certain perceptions, bypassing any need for interpretation. Taking this a step further, the game might even force players to adopt certain desires or behaviors. For example, a score attack game could have a toggle which forces the player to believe that scoring is the most important goal. Whether such technology ever becomes possible or not, it clarifies the concept of "interactivity". Even if a merger only happened temporarily, for that period of time, it would no longer be possible to draw a meaningful distinction between the player and the game. Setting aside any worrying implications of such technology, this could be a very enjoyable "activity", but it would cease to be "INTER-activity".</section>
- Posts: 187
- Threads: 28
- Joined: 2025 Jun
2025-12-08(Mon)12:16:49
No.
116
<section><span class="post-quote"><a class="post-backlink" href="#115">>>115</a></span>
02:54
"INTER-activity" requires a gap between the player and the game, which means that some amount of interpretation must happen in the player's mind. Such communication is inherently ambiguous, but can be quite subtle and nuanced nonetheless. For example, what does this image represent?
<div class="post-image-holder"><span class="post-image-type">PNG</span><img alt="half_heart_left.png" class="post-image" data-image-hash="f1f2daa348bdc90f6e259a9ae7fe0fa61ee4ffadd5782f2a25be4072ca226de9" data-media-id="530" data-media-supertype="IMAGE" data-media-type="image/png" data-url-src-full="https://media.jovian-embers.net/up_de9/f1f2daa348bdc90f6e259a9ae7fe0fa61ee4ffadd5782f2a25be4072ca226de9.png" url-src-thumb="https://media.jovian-embers.net/up_de9/t_f1f2daa348bdc90f6e259a9ae7fe0fa61ee4ffadd5782f2a25be4072ca226de9.png" /></div>
A simple answer would be that it represents the character's health display, but perhaps you've already skipped to a deeper intuition which can be summed up more easily: DANGER.
These are two different levels of interpretation. The first-order interpretation understands the purpose of the health bar, which can be rationally explained as a simple measurement of a quantifiable statistics. The second-order interpretation understands the "implication" of the health bar being low, which is immediately intuitive, but quite difficult to fully articulate. After all, there are many different behaviors the player might wish to adopt because of this low health bar.
Games frequently involve life-or-death situations for the protagonist to overcome, but thankfully those struggles are not real, so even if a game features diegetic death and respawn for the protagonist, the only one TRULY punished by a setback is the player. Therefore, we might say that "punishment" is a way the game motivates players. Similarly, players often seek "rewards" for their accomplishments, and these rewards could be considered another form of motivation. Put simply, the game attempts to provide positive and negative motivation in the form of rewards and punishments, respectively. Certainly there are tense moments on the cusp of failure where punishment FEELS imminent, but remember, every piece of audio-visual information must be INTERPRETED by the player in order to make any sense.
With that in mind, we should ask a simple question: who ultimately punishes the player?
If you're reluctant to admit that it's actually the player who self-punishes, some reflection on your own experiences might make this more obvious.
- Have you ever been frustrated by a certain game, only to notice that other players seem totally unperturbed by similar events?
- Have you ever enjoyed a particular moment in a game, only to notice that other players became frustrated at that same moment?
- Have you ever found a game to be rewarding, only to revisit it and find that it no longer provides such satisfaction?
- Have you ever found a game to be pointless, only to give it a second chance, and find much more enjoyment than before?
It's my belief that any reasonably experienced player MUST answer "yes" to at least one of these questions.
The first two prove that desires can vary between players, while the last two prove that desires can vary within a single player over time.
It's possible to feel rewarded by a game one day, and not the next. Therefore, rewards and punishments are not solely a property of a game; at most, they're a combinatorial property of the game itself, and an INTERPRETATION of it. Even a large setback need not feel punishing, if you find every moment of gameplay to be intrinsically enjoyable.</section>
- Posts: 187
- Threads: 28
- Joined: 2025 Jun
2025-12-08(Mon)12:17:27
No.
117
<section><span class="post-quote"><a class="post-backlink" href="#116">>>116</a></span>
05:39
Of course, designers have many methods at their disposal to provoke a feeling of punishment or reward. Developers refer to these tools as "Extrinsic Motivation", because they originate from OUTSIDE of the player. Extrinsic rewards include: achievements; unlockables; loot; narrative progress; cosmetics; and so on. At this point, we enter the realm of psychology, which could postulate theories as to why certain types of players value certain types of motivators, but it's not necessary to know the underlying causes for this purposes of this discussion.
Motivators become widespread because they often work; if they didn't, then different motivators would be deployed instead. As such, we can assume that typical motivators are typically appealing, but as long as humanity retains any diversity at all, then it must be true that certain players will never care about certain types of extrinsic motivation. Some people will never care about cosmetics, whereas some will never care about achievements. Similarly, any given player is not necessarily compelled by every single form of extrinsic motivation. This might even vary depending on the game. If the story is particularly engaging, a player might become more invested in narrative progress than usual. Or if the gameplay is especially enjoyable, they might use collectibles as an excuse to extend their playtime.
Assuming a developer just wants to create a broadly appealing game, it might seem wise to include as much extrinsic motivation as possible, but there are at least some exceptions where motivations can conflict with one another. Cutscenes always take some amount of time to resolve, so if a developer includes cutscenes in an effort to maximize a player's narrative motivation, they will inevitably cause some portion of "narrative-averse" players to suffer, however slightly. Every second indulging the story is another second that player's intrinsic desires are not being met, which causes their average enjoyment to drop. Put simply, extrinsic motivation CAN backfire.
The term "Extrinsic Motivation" is obviously applicable to certain types of rewards, but it's also relevant in minute cases. For example, why are Mario's coins such a successful motivator, even though their instrumental value is sometimes quite low? A large part of their desirability probably comes from the simple fact that they resemble a valuable real-world object, and they make a pleasant noise when touched. If picking up a coin caused Baby Mario to cry, players might avoid them, no matter how advantageous they were. Likewise, when Ratchet and Clank are showered in Bolts, it sounds similar to a slot machine's payout. Perhaps these kinds of subtle associations could be considered exploitive [sic], but developers don't always have an alternative, because the game itself could be considered a form of extrinsic motivation, one which promises a somehow enjoyable experience.</section>
- Posts: 187
- Threads: 28
- Joined: 2025 Jun
2025-12-08(Mon)12:17:48
No.
118
<section><span class="post-quote"><a class="post-backlink" href="#117">>>117</a></span>
08:18
Before even progressing past the title screen, players are already hoping to derive something from the interaction. These even applies to less hedonic [sic] genres and styles, such as horror, where players expect a partially negative experience along the way. Sometimes the payoff for a scary or dour game only arrives after an entire playthrough, when the player finds catharsis or can enjoy the intellectual stimulation offered by retrospection. Whatever the case, there's always the hope of something ultimately positive, so developers can't be expected to deny every desire every time.
Subversion is also not a fool-proof way of avoiding extrinsic motivation, since the player might have opposing values to the developer. Inverting my example from earlier, if a developer removes all cutscenes in an effort to eliminate extrinsic motivators, they will cause some portion of "narrative-averse" players to feel MORE rewarded rather than less. Over time, any subversive game will also develop a reputation, and it will become more likely to attract more players who see its unusual elements as an enjoyable aspect of the experience. So not only is it unreasonable to expect developers to avoid extrinsic motivation, it may not even be POSSIBLE for them to do so.
It seems as though some developers HAVE deployed extrinsic motivators as a cynical way of compensating for otherwise lacking gameplay, but even so, extrinsic motivation is NOT inherently bad. Rather, the important thing to note is that even the most overt extrinsic motivators ALWAYS requires an intrinsic spark in order to have any effect. This is not to say that the intrinsic component is always under a player's control; it would still qualify as "interactivity" even if every instance of damage caused the player to be stabbed in the abdomen by an automated knife. Nobody could be expected to override their aversion to such a horrific punishment by willpower alone, but we can also see that a sufficiently numbed and reckless player would still not be motivated by fear. Thankfully, these kinds of physiological responses are less pronounced when restricted to audio-visual feedback.
An extremely loud noise or a flashing light might also cause a nigh uncontrollable response, but accepting certain stimuli, it seems reasonable to assume that players CAN exert a certain amount of control over their intrinsic motivators. Therefore, in many cases, players can simply invalidate extrinsic motivation.
No matter how many tricks are deployed, games happen in your mind, including their punishments, rewards, and everything else in between. To the extent that you can influence your own mind, you can also influence your experience with any games you choose to play.</section>
- Posts: 3
- Threads: 0
- Joined: 2026 Jul
2026-07-20(Mon)14:39:03
No.
199
<section>Test 1 2 3</section>
- Posts: 3
- Threads: 0
- Joined: 2026 Jul
2026-07-20(Mon)14:40:15
No.
200
<section>Test 1 2 3 4</section>
- Posts: 3
- Threads: 0
- Joined: 2026 Jul
2026-07-20(Mon)14:49:03
No.
201
<section><span class="post-quote"><a class="post-backlink" href="#115">>>115</a></span>
Testing node reply</section>