What is gaming, what makes a game good?

#1 Gaming is the act of playing games.

A game is good if its participants have fun and want to play it more.

#2 This is the kind of question that should be asked more often. I don't have a ton of time to contribute to this, but this is one theory I have of what makes a good game: (My core theories are bolded)

Minimal time to action. When you are looking at FPS games, a game like CounterStrike runs in very short cycles. The time to action is short. The action is intense, and then you start FROM SCRATCH! (Well almost, you know moneys etc.) I personally feel this is one of the reasons Tribes was better than Tribes 2, and why I like Tribes LT so much. The time to action is minimal. The game is long, however your action is in intense bursts and you get back to the action quickly. (This counterbalances the long games along with infinite respawns, unlike CounterStrike).

Marble Blast Ultra multiplayer is also similar. Short rounds mean people can play many rounds in one sitting, the minimum time investment for good gameplay experience is short. This means the player can mentally sit down and play the game without any hangups on thinking, "I must devote at least 15 minutes to this or it won't be a positive experience for me." They can sit down for 5 minutes and have a good game. Now, interestingly enough, this lends iteself to more additive gameplay. Beause time to action is short, and minimum time investment is low, the player will be very likely to sit down and play the game because they percieve it to take little time. Since the time to action is so short, and they instantly become a relevant part of the action, and continue to be in the position to take action which effects the game, they will sit down and play it for quite some time.

Basically, I don't play games anymore unless I percieve them to have a low time investment. My brain renforces to itself that I, "don't have time to spend an hour playing games." Now I may sit down and play a game, like Marble Blast Ultra, for more than an hour, but that, to my brain, is ok, because I know that, at any point after the minimum time investment, I can put the controler down and walk away with a positive game experience. I think the minimum time investment in MBU is around 3-5 minutes. Since the level times are short, I can put the controler down at any increment of the minimum time investment, and have my desire for fun satisfied.

I should really blog this, come to think of it.

Anyway, I hope that helps you. I forget the last time a question like this was asked, but I hope it gets asked more often. I see questions all the time which I consider to be trivial, not because they are easy questions, but because they don't address the issues I think really need discussion. 'Does TSE support XYZ lighting model?' Who freakin' cares, man?! If it doesn't, here's a Siggraph paper, and HLSL...make it so. These are the questions there aren't books on, yet. (If anyone knows one please post it, though.) This is what should be discussed in gaming classes. There is theory behind everything, and it is important to examine these things.

#3 Thank you for your reply, I love it and will put it to good use.

Quote:
I should really blog this, come to think of it.

You should.

If anyone has any more thoughts on the matter I'd love to read them.

#4 Great ideas Pat. A blog addressing this would be pretty cool.

#5 I dunno about that, I personally think it comes down to the individual, and what the individual finds entertaining.

Games like CS bore me to tears. Give me a meaty RPG anytime. Or a deep RTS. FPS is a nice stress reliever, but I've played so many that they are all running together, I don't feel particularly interested unless they offer something unique. Prey seems pretty cool, and I'm excited for Dark Messiah.

For me, its not about instant gratification, and the fact that a game takes 2.7 seconds to get to the payoff isn't a major factor in whether I play or not. Since my time is short these days, in fact, I'm LESS likely to play those games. If I only have 15 minutes to do something, I'll listen to music, maybe read. Those type of games just seem too shallow to offer me a reason to actually spend time on them. If a game pulls me in and keeps me in, I'll find the time for it. KOTOR sucked me in for instance. Gimme storyline and character development anyday.

#6 What is gaming?

Gaming is playing... games. I don't know how else to answer that question.


What makes a game good?

I think that for most people, a game is good if it is enjoyable on multiple levels. Example: cool to look at, interesting to listen to, challenging to play, immersive, rewarding.

I think that a game is great if it is enjoyable on most or all levels.

I think that a game is outstanding if while being great it also breaks new ground in some way and suprises the player and raises the bar for enjoyment.

I think that a game can also be great if it doesn't have all the bases of enjoyment down but has some groundbreaking element that makes up for being uneven. It doesn't make it outstanding, but it's enough to make it great.

I say this with the assumtion that enjoyment is 'in the eyes of the beholder' and that some things in games are fun your you and make me wish I were never born when I have to play them. I hate MMOs but I love Oblivion, NWN and the Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale games. I love single player FPS games, but only ever enjoyed playing Soldier of Furtune 2 in online multiplayer. I love love love any kind of sword fighting game... but the only sport game I like is snowboarding. I also love Turn Based Strategy games like Disciples 2 and Heroes V but I'm still staring at the box for Battle For Middle Earth. It's very complicated... I don't necessarily only like one type of game, but I definitely have likes and dislikes and some hates.

EDIT: I would like to add 'eveness' to enjoyable. A game that is enjoyable on multiple levels and evenly enjoyable on those levels.

#7 So would you agree that we could draw a line between the following?

- casual gaming, playing a quick game because you have time to kill
- more serious gaming (wouldnt call it hardcore gaming yet), playing something because of the story (other motivations?) like Fable, Command & Conquer, Monkey Island, etc.

On a personal note I still love how fast e.g. Broken Sword 3 can be launched, to start playing the story again right away. Playing the story takes longer then Pat Wilson mentioned in his post, but once you hit the shortcut, you get the menu quite fast (no intro's or publisher names) after which you hit Load and continue your game.

#8 I've never liked the distinction between casual and hardcore gaming. It seems contrived to me.

When I have hours to kill, I don't suddenly become more tolerant of longer loading times. They still annoy me. Nor do I keep the "deep story" games in the closet until I have half a day free.

When I have 20 minutes to kill, my gaming interests dont change. In fact, I rarely if ever decide to play anything but what is my current game favorite because of time. All I do is play for a bit and save. HOMM5 is awesome, but its quite slow. Its my current game of choice. When I only have half an hour, I start a stage, then save it and continue later. I don't load up a bubble-popper game. If anything, that would give me a bigger feeling of wasting my precious game time. My interests just don't shift based on time like that. Maybe its just me.

In every case, you're playing a game because you have some free time, and want to fill it with an enjoyable activity. What you consider enjoyable is dependant to your personality. Whenever I play games I'm engaging in what I consider "casual" activity. My definition may be different to other peoples, but I just don't view it as 2 distinct modes like that. I just play what strikes my interest.

#9 The MMO model should fit into here too. I mean, why should it be that *anyone* sits in front of a computer and camps a FBSS in Everquest like we used to. Personally, I blame the schools! ;)

#10 @Gareth Fouche

DUDE, HOMM5 is sweet, but what the hell happened with all of the play start bugs?! I finally had to download an exe that didn't do the cd check because it would start no matter what computer I was using. It was crazy. But it's a sweet game. I LOVE turn based fantasy games like this and Disciples. I can't wait for Disciples 3 this year. :)

#11 Speaking of Turn Based Fantasy RPGs. Why all the MMOs when a game like HOMM5 is a natural for Torque? Seriously, of all the games that an indie can make... a turnbased game seems like the best choice for a limited budget. If I wasn't crazy busy with work game dev, I would want to make a Turn Based Fantasy RPG with Torque.

#12 I agree Anton, plus the turn based market is pretty starved of offerings, as far as I know, so it could be a good niche to target, financially.


As to HOMM5, I've had no problems with it whatsoever, except for the one mission of the Inferno campaign, which is nigh on impossibly difficult due to some wonky scripting. Luckily, the patch sorts it out. I'm loving that game though.

#13 I've made a thread on the Gamedev.net forums about the same subject, trying to get even more great reactions. I hope you don't mind I have quoted some of your replies to get the discussion started? If you're interested, the new thread can be found here: www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=411725. Unfortunately it doesnt have many responses yet.

#14 Like said above, gaming is playing games. Be it baseball, hide & seak, Quake, Mario, etc.

What makes a good game? That's near impossible to put down on paper. Once you put down bullet points then you miss the point of the game. Uness you have fun making it don't expect other to have fun playing it. If people don't have fun playing it why didn't you start making it fun BEFORE you released it? :) (I've got a power point Ken Willians, formerly of Sierra Online, did about how they did stuff at Sierra. If someone could host it I'd give it to them for others here to check out. It's a good presentation). But I'd say a good game is one I install back on my computer & play after I initialy install it (by that defination, Half Life 2 would not be a good game to me but checkers would be)


I don't find a difference between casual or hardcore games myself. It's all based on someone's POV. On my way home from QuakeCon this year I met a woman who goes to bridge tourny's around the US. Obiviously many QuakeConer's wouldn't consider her hardore because she jsut plays bridge, a card game. But she wouldn't consider us hardcore because we haven't been playing for 50 years. :)

#15 I'd love to see that presentation. What size is it?

#16 ~1.3mb. I just e-mailed it to ya @ your e-mail in your profile. It came from my at planetquake dot com e-mail.

#17 Hmm affraid I didnt get it. My gmail rudi dot vereijken at gmail dot com works a lot better probably.

Edit: got it! Thanks.

#18 What is gaming?
The act of gaming is to take decisions, the brain main work is to take data and generate options, if you choose right the reward stimulate the brain, choose wrong and the penalty stimulate the brain too.

What makes a game good?
Good games are those games which can stimulate the brain in the right way, not to hard to be frustrating (bad reward), and not to easy to been boring (bad reward).

So good games have an AUDIENCE, games must be restricted to specific people, if not you are going to have mixed rewards that make the game to hard for some people and too easy for another.

Choose right and your game will be good... ;)

#19 Gaming is in three different categories: Hardcore, Normal, Light

The hardcore gamer is likely to be playing a game as soon as it comes out, only talk about his games, and sometimes are caleld the "nerds". They invest time and money into video games and better consoles.

The normal gamer has more of a life but sits down at least for a hour every day to get a good game in then get back to his life.

The light gamer only plays seldomly, they enjoy the games but don't invest large amounts of time or money in them.

Now a good game is one that can appeal to all three

-It lasts a long time but has shorter levels
-Doesn't involve trial and error which takes away the hardcore gamer's "immersion" and the light gamer's time
-Enjoyable to many people, not dull, doesn't make the player want to smash his new PS3 because your game is so gay.

#20 Good god, this could turn into a huge essay, but I will try to sum up my approach.

I believe there are 2 primary aspects to any game, and for the sake of brevity I will call them movement and strategy.

Let's assume a scale of 1 to 10 on each with 1 lowest and 10 highest

I believe all games can be rated in both aspects... for example.. chess is low on movement, the number of move options are minimal.. pieces move very simply but the strategy is hugely complex.. so it would probably rate a 3,8.

However a tabletop miniatures game may well have a huge number of movement options, but be light on strategy (once you get into the right position, the strategy is more or less taken care of) so maybe an 8,3

I also believe gamers come in 2 prime aspects, and for the sake of brevity I will call them attentive and thoughtful

again rating these on the same scales, you get a mix of numbers.. less attentive but highly thoughtfull makes a 3,8 again.

I believe a game is fun for the individual player when their scores match those of the game.

so a person with lots of distractions around them and not wanting to spend a long time pondering options will go for a game that is a 3,3 rating.

A person with a dedicated gaming slot to play in who wants to be mentally stretched may look for an 8,8 game, but next time they may drop to a 3,3 game.. it depends on circumstances, which certainly at the player level will follow normal human rules.. meaning it can change every time they sit down to play based on current circumstances.

In my mind games such as the trad FPS in single player mode are probably in the 6,4 bracket. The MMORPG players need to have a first game digit around 8, and their second digit will define which MMORPG they are happiest playing... WOW maybe a 4 the first EQ probably a 7 etc etc.

Whether this makes any sense or not I have no idea, but thats my theory anyway in it's shortest form :)

I also believe that games and playes follow mainly a normalisation bell curve with max acceptance on a game of 5,5 and a most common player type and circumstance of 5,5

I believe the answers to the question are not dependant on the game... they are dependant on that player's current rating matched to the current games rating and ultimately this means there is no one type of GREAT game for all but the closer you can get to the 5,5 rating, the bigger the market will be within acceptable limits:)

Regards

Graham Evans