What experience designers can learn from games
Last month Aleks Krotoski spoke at dConstruct on Playing the web: how gaming makes the internet (and the world) a better place (listen to the podcast, or see a write up of the talk here).
Two main things I got out of this talk: (1) carrot: good games should reward people for contributing more, with points, levels, collectable items. (2) goals: good games should have an end goal.
Casting my mind back to various games I’ve played, I’ve never been so hooked on a game as Ultima Online. I played this game compulsively for about a year – quitting only when I really needed to focus on schoolwork (and when I finally switched to a Mac).
Rewards and goals are everywhere in Ultima Online. The gameplay is rich on hundreds of different levels: across the macrocosm of the game down to the tiny little details. I loved that spell ingredients, known as ‘reagents’, spawned across the land – which could be picked up and used, or sold. I could also harvest cotton from cotton fields and sell it to tailors in the town. If you’re like me, you’ll find both of these ideas hopelessly novel.








Another thing I liked about the game: killing monsters gives a character an amount of “fame”. And with enough “fame”, you gain a title. This brings a compelling social aspect to the game: you have something to show other players for your participation in the game. Your title also reflects your skill level, ranging from “novice” to “legendary” (they might have introduced more levels since).

Building a character within a system, within a world, is satisfying, compelling, and addictive. A character can take one of hundreds of possibilities. The game is not just about “killing stuff” within a contrived “level”. In addition to being a mage or a warrior, you can make a living as a tailor, a chef, a bard, a thief, and even a beggar. Skill increases as you practise it: so, to build your bard character, you’d need to first raise enough gold to buy an instrument, then walk around playing said instrument.
This does get a little dull. In some professions, raising skill is much too mechanical and technical for sustained interest, so you could macro or automate it to rise. (If you get caught, though, you put your account at risk.) On the whole, I think the game manages this well: although it can get boring, it is more likely that you will invest the time to build your character than it is for you to give up or quit the game.
How does Ultima Online manage this? You can clearly see the structure and process for raising a skill. In other words, you can see the journey ahead, and know what you need to do in order to reach the end. You can see the rewards in the future: e.g., a tailor with 100.00% skill can make better quality leather armour for your mage. An animal tamer with 100.00% skill has a much better chance at successfully taming a dragon. Getting to 100.00% skill is difficult, but fun: the rewards are both in the journey and in the destination.
I think Ultima Online is the perfect game. Sadly, its membership is dwindling: possibly because World of Warcraft is the new MMORPG vogue, and possibly because gamers aren’t known for their lengthy attention spans.
So, some basic principles which are useful to interaction and experience designers, or anyone planning a social website:
- Reward your users for participation.
- Allow them to build something, and allow them to see the end-goal.
Another principle:
- Give your users a structure: give them limitations
From ‘Rules of Play’:
The idea that players subordinate their behaviors to the restrictions of rules in order to experience play – and its pleasures – is a fundamental aspect of games. The restrictions of rules facilitate play, and in doing so, generate pleasure for players.
From L. S. Vyogotsky:
To observe the rules of the play structure promises much greater pleasure from the game than the gratification of an immediate impulse.
Now: how to bring these principles to social websites?
2 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
A lot of these principles have been implicit in the design of some of the better social communities over the past couple of years, so it’s interesting to read them formalised here.
Whereas in Ultima or WoW there’s a specific game objective, on social websites the objective is surely to make connections and gain recognition for your content. Even if there’s another point, like business networking or self-help, you need your content to be seen by the right people to be able to achieve those things.
Although in a lot of ways OKCupid is psychotic, it’s an example of a directed social community that does this very well. You’re led through a series of goals that allow you to participate in more meaningful ways, which in turn will probably lead to more profile views, and hopefully more dates. The site then benefits because there’s more content to interact with. The downside is that everything is on rails; there’s very little of the serendipity and fuzzy searching that can make social websites great.
More generally, allowing people to favourite content and using this as part of an invisible metric for picking out interesting items that are then showcased (as Flickr does) will probably have an effect on usage. Certainly on the communities we’ve run, and having spoken to other Elgg-based community owners, adding simple ‘latest content’ and ‘most popular this week’ (using favourites rather than raw views) boxes to the dashboard have made a massive difference in engagement.
It’d be very interesting to take this further, using accepted methodologies from other fields (as you’ve done here with game design). If anyone’s interested in exploring, we’ve got a platform …
Social games also need a mechanism to demonstrate to others your achievements - this becomes as much a game as any of the more explicity game functions. The social nature of guilds, the hierarchies they make possible and the means for co-operation (and self-aggrandisement) are something that social sites can really use to add that element of gaming to the web. It’s a shame still that “gaming the system” is to many a dirty phrase.
I think Aleks made some good points. The issues she raised of the control of data was valid though - game developers (and designers) don’t like to lose control of that data; even within the same company it’s near-impossible to develop mashups, let alone have people ‘in the wild’ play with the data. Still, when she asked whether anyone from the games industry was there, she didn’t see the entire row of hands go up near the back.