Game Design Patterns and
other Analytical Tools
staffan.bjork@chalmers.se
1
But first…


Note change in deadline for assignment
2: now 2011-02-08 23:59
Game Jam starts today, 17:00 in InDesign




Absolutely last change to register 12:30 today
Already started in some areas, go to the main
web site to check
Unfortunately Johan Peitz had to cancel…
Assignments #1 hopefully graded during
the weekend…
Structure of today’s lecture

Design Languages

Examples of languages






Formal Abstract Design Tools
The MDA framework
The 400 Project
Game Ontology Project
Gameplay Design Patterns
Using Analytical Tools
Problems in Gameplay Design








Explain values of novel game concepts
Understanding differences between games
Gain understanding within development teams
Communication between developers and stakeholders
Exploit new platforms and technologies
Depersonalize intended gameplay
Describe gameplay problems
Specify foci of gameplay evaluations
Notions and concepts needed – a language for the design of
gameplay
4/42
Design Languages
J. Rheinfrank & S. Evenson in Bringing Design to Software (Ed. T. Winograd)

Purpose and Use


Allows designers to embed meaning into artifacts
Allow artifacts to express meaning to people



Allow artifacts to be assimilated into peoples’ lives
Components

Collection of elements



For example, the Component Framework from the previous lecture
Principles of organization

How the elements relate and interact with each other
Qualifying situations


Related to the concept of affordances
When is it suitable to use components
Gameplay design


Deals with an abstract and emergent feature – interaction
Needs to deal with both the interaction itself and that which
enables the interaction
5/42
What bad effects can rise
from analyzing games?
From using frameworks or design
languages?
Examples of design
languages?
Formal Abstract Design Tools
(articles online, e.g. gamasutra)
Doug Church
(Ultima Underworld I-II, System Shock,
Thief I-III, Deus Ex I-II, Lara Croft Tomb
Raider: Legend, FreQuency)
8
Formal Abstract Design Tools Overview

Formal


Abstract


“to emphasize the focus on underlying ideas, not specific genre
constructs”
Design


“implying precise definition and the ability to explain it to
someone else”
"as in, well, we're designers”
Tools

"since they'll form the common vocabulary we want to create”
9/42
Formal Abstract Design Tools Examples
Intention
Making an implementable plan of one's own creation in response
to the current situation in the game world and one's
understanding of the game play options.
Perceivable Consequence
A clear reaction from the game world to the action of the player.
10/42
Mechanics, Dynamics,
Aesthetics
http://algorithmancy.8kindsoffun.com/
Marc LeBlanc
(Ultima Underworld II, System Shock, Flight
Unlimited, Terra Nova, Thief I-II, Deus Ex, NFL
2K2, NBA 2K2, Oasis, Field Commander)
11
MDA - overview

Games are state machines

Games are programs
Code
Processes
Requirements
Rules
Game Sessions
“Fun”
Mechanics
Dynamics
Aesthetics
12/42
MDA – Comments about
aesthetics

“We need to understand the emotional requirements of our
software”


Regarding requirements



Fun, challenge, sense of achievement, sorrow, frustration
“With productivity software, the user brings his goals to the
application”
“With games, the application brings goals to the user”
Regarding goals

“As designers, we can choose certain aesthetics as goals for our
game design”


Aesthetics of gameplay?
“As with other software, our process is driven by requirements,
not features”
13/42
MDA - 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. Submission
Game as pastime
14/42
How does the MDA model
support analyzing games?
Designing games?
400 project
http://www.theinspiracy.com/400_project.htm
Noah Falstein
(Maniac Mansion, Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe,
The Secret of Monkey Island, Loom, Indiana Jones and
The Last Crusade: The Graphic Adventure, Monkey
Island 2: LeChuck's Revenge, Indiana Jones and the
Fate of Atlantis, Star Wars: Empire at War, ParaWorld)
16
400 Project - Overview

Help Game Designers by providing them with rules



Examples






Normative
Best Practice description
Fight Player Fatigue
Make Subgames
Begin at the Middle
Make Challenges Vary in More than Degree
Provide Both Safe and Dangerous Areas
400?

“That’s just a rough number, …”
17/42
400 Project - Format






[Name]
A concise, imperative statement of the rule, both as a
sentence and paragraph
Its domain of application
 (both its hierarchy, e.g. a rule about rules, a rule about the
development process, or just a rule about games
themselves, and genre, e.g. Applies only to RTS games or
Online games).
Rules or circumstances that it trumps
 over which this rule takes precedence)
Rules or circumstances that it is trumped by
An example or two from well-known published games, if
applicable, as well as counter-examples that show the
consequences of not following the rule
18/42
400 Project - Example
Provide Clear Short-Term Goals
Description
Always make it clear to the player what their short-term objectives are. This can be done explicitly by telling them directly, or
implicitly by leading them towards those goals through environmental cues. This avoids the frustration of uncertainty and gives
players confidence that they are making forward progress.
Domain
This is a basic rule of game design, and applies to all games directly.
Trumps
It trumps the rule “Emphasize Exploration and Discovery” because the player should not have to discover their short-term goals.
If discovery is warranted, it should be to discover the tools or information needed to achieve the clear, short-term goals, not to
discover the goals themselves. It also trumps “Provide an Enticing Long-Term Goal”, as it is more important to have the player
know what to do next than to simply know that they have to Kill the Evil Wizard/Save the World/Rescue the Princess.
Trumped by
It is trumped by the rule “Make the First Player Action in a Game Painfully Obvious”. However, often that first obvious action in a
game – read the paper, click on the wise old man, shoot the monster – should trigger an explanation of the first short-term goal
beyond that.
Examples
When Hal Barwood and I designed Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis we gave the player explicit goals throughout the game by
having the supporting characters guide the objectives. The initial theft of an artifact by a Nazi agent led the player (in the role of
Indiana Jones) to Madam Sophia, who in turn presented Indy with his next objective, and so on. One short-term goal, like
“convince this character to give you an artifact”, often triggered conversation with the character that led to the next goal, like
“find the lost dialog of Plato”.
Shigeru Miyamoto uses clear short-term goals throughout all of his games. In Mario 64 he uses explicit goals like characters or
signs that tell you how to move, jump or swim, adjacent to appropriate obstacles. Other goals are implicit ones, as when you’re
left to explore the landscape at the beginning of the game with a large castle dominating the landscape and a drawbridge leading
right to it. He also uses strings of floating coins to pick up as implicit goals that help lead the player into attempting jumps and
using catapults or cannons pointing toward the coins.
More recently, Halo from Bungie does an admirable job of using the landscape itself and suggestions from both an AI companion
and fellow Marines to channel you towards the next short-term goal.
19/42
400 Project - Current Status

Work in progress


112 rules in list
2 described accord to format


Others in 250 words or less
Contributors from several professionals


Sid Meier, Raph Koster, Warren Spector,
Albert Einstein…
http://www.theinspiracy.com/400_project.htm
20/42
Is it good or bad to have
rules on how you should
design?
Does it support analyzing games?
Game Ontology Project
http://www.gameontology.org
Mateas M., Zagal, J. &
Fernandez, C.
22
Game Ontology Project - Overview

Ontology




“a branch of metaphysics concerned with the nature and relations
of being” and “a particular theory about the nature of being or the
kinds of things that have existence”
Identifies important structural elements
Relationships between elements
Organizes these hierarchically


Parent-Child relation
Top Levels in the hierarchy




Interface
Rules
Entity Manipulation
Goals
23/42
Game Ontology Project - Format

Category: Name

Examples



Relations



Strong example
Weak example
Parent
Children
References
24/42
Game Ontology Project - Example
Locus of Manipulation
A games locus of manipulation is where the players ability to control and influence the game is located. In many games, the
players manipulative powers are tied to either an on-screen or implied avatar, such as the on screen representation of Mario in
Super Mario Sunshine (Koizumi and Usui, 2002) or an implied player avatar like in Doom (Carmack, 1993). In other games it is
tied to a number of entities, whether anthropomorphic, as in Warcraft III (Pardo, 2002) or more object like, such as the tetrads in
Tetris (Pajitnov, 1986). In all of these cases, at any given moment of play, the player exerts control over some game entity or
entities, but not over others.
Secondarily, the locus of manipulation provided within a game can work with other aspects of the games presentation and rules
to create a sense of identification between the player and the role he plays within a game, or Player Position (Costikyan, 1994).
This is especially true in games where the player controls an avatar or a group of anthropomorphic entities. In Super Mario
Sunshine (Koizumi and Usui, 2002), the game centers the players control and view of the world on Mario so as to lead the player
to identify with Mario. In Madden NFL 2004 (Tiburon, 2003), the player is led to identify with the team he is playing, either as a
team, favorite players, or in the capacity of coach. The game provides presentational and subgame modes to reinforce each
position.
Parent
* Input Method
Children
* Multiple Entity Manipulation
* Single Entity Manipulation
References
Carmack, J. (1993). Doom. id Software, dos edition.
Costikyan, G. (1994). I have no words and I must design. Interactive Fantasy, (2).
Koizumi, Y. and Usui, K. (2002). Super Mario Sunshine. Nintendo, gamecube edition.
Pajitnov, A. (1986). Tetris. Dos edition.
Pardo, R. (2002). Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos. Blizzard Entertainment, windows edition.
Tiburon, developer (2003). Madden NFL 2004. Electronic Arts, xbox edition.
25/42
Game Ontology Project – Current
Status

About ~200 entries

Wiki-based project


Involve the gamer community
That is developed by players

Describes games from the player’s perspective

Does not seem to have been update for quite some while
http://www.gameontology.org
26/42
Do players provide a good
or bad basis for developing
an ontology?
How does it support analyzing or
designing games?
Gameplay Design Patterns
www.gamedesignpatterns.org
www.gameplaydesignpatterns.org
Staffan Björk & Jussi Holopainen
(Not any games you would know about)
28
Origin of Design Patterns

Patterns of design within
architecture






“The Quality Without a
Name”
Re-Use allow accumulation
and generalization of
solutions
Allow all members of a
community or design group
to participate
Framed as pairs of problems
and solutions
Embedded ideology
Popularized in objectoriented programming
Our View on Design Patterns

Describes design choices



Guides making design choices




Offers possible explanations why
for making these design choices
Can also codify unintentional
features for later intentional use
Describes how to instantiate
Highlights possible consequences
Points out options
Game Design Patterns a way to
describe components on all
levels within the design
language
Format of a Gameplay Design
Pattern


Name
Introduction




Examples
Using the Pattern




One line description
Short stand-alone description
Diegetic Aspects
Interface Aspects
Narrative Aspects
Consequences
Relations between Gameplay
Design Patterns




Show how specific choices can affect the whole
design
Suggestions for how to achieve characteristics
Can point towards reasons for problems in design
Types of Relations






Can Instantiate
Can Modulate
Can Be Instantiated By
Can Be Modulated By
Possible Closure Effects
Potentially Conflicting With
α→β
β(α)→β⃰
α←β
α(β)→ α⃰
α∆β
α≠β
Examples of Patterns










Power-Ups
Boss Monster
Paper-Rock-Scissor
Cut Scenes
Achievements
Parallel Lives
Private Game Spaces
Role Reversal
Red Queen Dilemma
Orthogonal Unit Differentiation
Freedom of Choice
The freedom to choose between several different actions which all seem meaningful.
It has been can argue that for a game to be a game at all, the players have to be able to make what they feel are
interesting choices. For example the quote attributed to Sid Meier's "a good game is a series of interesting choices"
argues this, as does the definitions of game from Costikyan where player make decisions[1] and Abt where players
are independent decision-makers[2]. This means that the choices must have seemingly different effects and have
effects that are meaningful. If these conditions are met, players can feel that they have the Freedom of Choice within
the game system and they can affect the outcome of the game.
However, what constitutes interesting choices can vary between people. It can seem that there are no choices in some
goal-oriented activity requiring skills, e.g. solving puzzles or participating in some sports, but this is a matter of
perspective. Choosing strategies for how to lay a puzzle can be seen as an interesting choice if one is aware of the
different strategies. The same applies to many sports, including sprint races and weight-lifting, besides the different
strategies one can use while training. Similarly some games, e.g. Tic-Tac-Toe, provides several choices of where to
place one's tokens which may seem meaningful for a novice player but becomes less so for somebody that has
explored the whole possibility space of the game. Thus, Freedom of Choice of a game always needs to be considered
in relation to the intended players.
Examples
No Thanks only provides two possible actions to a player when it is his or her turn but still maintains a Freedom of
Choice since the choice between the actions are in nearly all cases important.
The board game Puerto Rico and the card game Race for the Galaxy not only provide each player the choice of what
action to perform during a turn of the game; the other players also get to perform each others' actions and thereby
get more opportunities to make decisions.
Open-ended games like the Sims series provide players with a multitude of game elements to interact with and many
types of actions for each game element. In addition, they give players the freedom to define their own goals within
the game.
Role-playing games such as Dungeons & Dragons and GURPS allow players a huge variety of choices since all actions
are judge by a game master that on the fly can allow or disallow actions depending on how well they fit the diegesis
and the character's abilities and personality.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern
Freedom of Choice can be achieved within three different areas in relation to games. First, players may have choices
to do before gameplay starts on how they wish to play a game. Second, they may have choices on which actions to
perform as part of the gameplay to affect the outcome of the game. Third, they may have choices to engage in other
types of activities while the gameplay progresses. An important aspect of designing for Freedom of Choice in
gameplay is to be aware that the allowing players several different ways of affect game states in not the most critical
issue; it is that they perceive that they have it. This makes the options of Exaggerated Perception of
Influence and Determinable Chance to Succeed important considerations for the pattern to appear. It is also worth
considering that even if a game may wish to have Freedom of Choice this can be centered on specific moments in the
game rather than be spread throughout the gameplay.
Besides the option to play or not, which is explored in September 12th, and when to play, which 4 Minutes and 33
Seconds of Uniqueness explores, the highest level of abstraction where players can have a Freedom of Choice is
regarding which rules a specific game instance should have. It is possible to consider all games of having flexible
rules when considering gaming rules[3], but games can be specifically designed to support choices of rules before
gameplay begins. This can be done by Player Decided Rule Setup or Game Masters to provide a wide possibility space
of which rule set to use while Optional Rules can offers boolean choices regarding specific rules. Games with Game
Masters or other Self-Facilitated Games provide the additional opportunity of being able to change rules during
games, but this can also be found in a few games that include rules for how to change or include more rules during
gameplay, e.g. Nomic and common version of Quarters. Although only modifying value in the game state or rule set
instead of changing the rules, Difficulty Settings can be considered another way of providing choices of how the
gameplay will develop before a game starts.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Moving away from choices of rules, games that support Strategic Planning gives players a Freedom of Choice in the
possibility to spend time considering interesting choices and strategies before gameplay. This is found in classical
board games such as Chess and Go, where studying opening sequences and maneuvers such as forking (in Chess) and
ladders (in Go) is relevant for future gameplay. In these cases it is voluntary if one wants to make choices related to
the game (e.g. choosing to test a certain first series of moves if possible) before the gameplay begins, but in other
games one must make decisions before the game can begin. Roleplaying systems such as GURPS and Dungeons &
Dragons have Initial Personalization in that they require players to engage in Character Creation in the set-up phase
of game sessions and these typically require many choices related to Attributes, Skills, and Tools of
their Characters (these choices can be avoided by using pre-generated Characters or using Randomness, but doing so
is a choice in itself). Games with No Direct Player Influence, e.g. Crobots and Progress Quest, takes this to the logical
extreme, in which players create their robots or characters and then have no direct interaction with the system during
the gameplay. In contrast, games that have Heterogeneous Game Element Ownership, e.g. Magic the
Gathering and Warhammer 40K, require players to make decisions on what game elements they own to bring to the
game since the game cannot be played without those elements. Players may also have choices regarding the diegetic
representations they control in the game, see Diegetic Aspects. Zero-Player Games take the idea of making interesting
choices before the game session is initiated to its logical extreme; one cannot (or do not need to) make any actions
once the game has begun so it is in one sense in conflict with the Freedom of Choice pattern while not in another
sense.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Related to the issue of choices before gameplay begins is the design on when it is possible to interact with the game.
For Single-Player Games this is usually in the players' control modulated by their context when one wants to play
(although connectivity can affect certain Trans-Game Information and thereby Global High Score Lists and Massively
Single-Player Online Games). Looking more specifically on ongoing gameplay, Interruptibility can be provided
through Game Pauses so they have the opportunity to decide when to take breaks while Save-Load Cycles allow
players to return to game states even after the underlying platform has been turned of in the intermediate time
period. Multiplayer Games require players to find each other and agree to play, but online games can support this
through Friend Lists and Game Lobbies. Persistent Game Worlds allow players to join at any time, and in one sense all
participants in such games are Late Arriving Players, but all types of actual gameplay may not be available at all times
(e.g. doing larger raids in Instances of World of Warcraft require coordination with other players). However, when
playing with others the options for when not to interact with the game (and other players) becomes more delicate
since it may be disrupt Team Balance or may be perceived as Analysis Paralysis. Tick-Based Games address this by
giving players a certain span of time during which they can do their actions, not only letting players know how often
they should do something in the game but also when the game will be updated. By setting the time period sufficiently
large compared to the time it takes to make the gameplay actions, players can have a bounded freedom of when to
play without disrupting gameplay for the other players. Games with Drop-In/Drop-Out instead make it possible for
players to close their game sessions while leaving other players' gameplay unaffected, typically through use
of Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment or AI Players.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Looking only at how players can have Freedom of Choice regarding gameplay with fixed rules, this can be achieved in
several ways: affecting the actions possible for the players, letting players affect the results in the game, and letting
players choose goals. An obvious way to increase the Freedom of Choice in a game is to expand the range of possible
actions players' can perform. This can be done from the beginning of the game by choosing from the wide range of
possible actions in a game (e.g. Aim & Shoot, Betting, Bidding, Collecting, Combat, Construction, Maneuvering,
Movement, Negotiation, and Trading) but having the possibility to not doing anything, doing No-Ops, is also a choice.
Although motivated by Limited Resources, Resource Management gives players opportunities of how to use
Resources, including No-Ops, by saving them in Containers and creating other types of Resources through
Converters. Producers can also be a source of Freedom of Choice - what Units, Tools, or Resources to produce, and
when to do so. The type of Investments that give players the greatest Freedom of Choice are following Arithmetic
Progression, since they does not give any Penalties or disadvantages between making one large Investment or several
smaller ones. Having Units is in one sense a trivial way to provide more Freedom of Choice, this since a player can
make more choices than if he or she only controls one unit, i.e. an Avatar.
For the reason of wishing to have Smooth Learning Curves, the number of options is often increased gradually
in Single-Player Games through Improved Abilities and New Abilities and is often represented
as Rewards or Character Development. In contrast, Multiplayer Games, including multiplayer versions of Single-Player
Games, typically provide all actions available at once to maintain Player Balance. The number of actions available may
however not be meaningful, and therefore not provide a interesting Freedom of Choice if there are not different
Risk/Rewards associated to them. The game No Thanks shows this in having important Freedom of Choice situations
where the only options consists of performing one action or taking a No-Ops. The use of Actions Have Diegetically
Social Consequences can be used to add a social dimension to actions and thereby let players have a Freedom of
Choice of how they should be perceived based upon which actions there are willing to perform.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Freedom of Choice can also be expanded by offering several variations of the same action to players. A generic way of
doing this is through Extended Actions, giving players control over how long time they wish to continue doing the
action, while more specific examples include having a variety of weapons (Tools) or spells to use when
performing Aim & Shoot, being able to do Maneuvering at different speeds, and choosing where Spawning occurs.
Related to this issue is the option of providing elements in Game Worlds to increase tactical options. If players are
able to detect Enemies first, they have the choice of avoiding them (which can also be seen as providing the Optional
Goal of Stealth) or whom to attack first. Likewise, Alarms and Traps may not only be hazards to the players‘
Avatars or Units but may also be used again Enemies directly or as distractions.
Actions in games lead to different types of events, and letting players choose what events these are is another form
of Freedom of Choice. Player Decided Results and Player-Decided Distribution of Rewards & Penalties are generic ways
of doing this while choosing between several different results of Randomness can be used in some
situations. Rerolls and Game Time Manipulation are specific game mechanic ways of providing options
of Reversibility to avoid a unwanted result, found for example in Bloodbowl and Braid respectively, while Save-Load
Cycles do this generally.
Ways of letting players have increased Freedom of Choice of what to do is to let them choose goals. Games can force
players to make choices regarding how to try achieving some types of goals while others can be voluntary to strive
towards. Games requiring Tactical Planning makes it necessary for players to consider the different actions available
and this is also present is games which require Game World Navigation, which both are benefited from Perfect
Information. Allowing some more Freedom of Choice, game designers can control the goals available in the game
through Selectable Sets of Goals which allows players to choose goals but only from a pre-determined collection; this
allows for a form of Player Defined Goals but more open versions of this requires Game Mastersor Self-Facilitated
Games. Optional Goals in contrast give players' the Freedom of Choice to pursue them or not. Specific examples of
this include trying to gain Alliances in Multiplayer Games, Achievements, and Player-Planned Character
Development which is a natural consequence of allowing Freedom of Choice in Character Development. Any game
which gives Creative Control to players, e.g. through Player Created Game Elements, can likewise be seen as giving
them Freedom of Choice in choosing Optional Goals.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Freedom of Choice is not only an effect of how many choices are available at any given moment, but also on how
important the decision between those choices is for the future gameplay. If a choice is to make an action which can
easily be undone immediately by the player or negated by another player, that choice is likely to not affect the
gameplay significantly in the long term and is therefore not really a choice. Making actions cause Irreversible
Events is one way to do this, and one example of how this can done is through the ko and superko rule of Go, which
make immediate or any repetition of past game state impossible, and thereby guarantee that each action has
meaning. How actions affect future gameplay of course dependent on context, for example in games with Emergent
Gameplay an action that is typically not significant can become very much so in special conditions. Similarly, games
where players have explicit choices of how to explore Predetermined Story Structures can be very important since
they do not know how the story will unfold but have desires how it should unfold and have assumptions on what
effects the choices will have. However, unless there is Randomness involved in the process, after a certain branch in
the story has been explored players know exactly what will happen and the series of choices building that branch
becomes meaningless except for wanting to re-experience the narration. The same problem occurs with games which
allow Game Mastery since only some actions may be interesting for skilled players, so to maintaining Freedom of
Choice in these games may require other types of freedoms, e.g. Achievements or Roleplaying.
Another way to increase the Freedom of Choice is to allow players to perform other actions than the ones directly
related to gameplay. Performing Extra-Game Actions such as Negotiation, Roleplaying, Social Interaction,
or Storytelling is one way to do this. Activity Blending offers another possibility, that of being able to do nongameplay related activities at the same time as playing the game, which may be important for pervasive games and
live-action roleplaying games.
Since too much Freedom of Choice can lead to Analysis Paralysis, it may also be relevant to limit the number of
choices available, which can be done in several ways. Limited Planning Ability lessens players' freedom to make longterm plans in a game while Predefined Goals may force players to have certain goals and tactics in a game. Enforced
Agent Behavior and Ultra-Powerful Events may enforce Narration Structures and cause Shrinking Game
Worlds. Inaccessible Areas and Movement Limitations can hinder players from moving within whole Game Worlds.
What players can do in the game may be defined as a Limited Set of Actions or require commitment to Extended
Actions or Collaborative Actions, and these actions may further be restricted by Decreased Abilities and Ability
Losses during gameplay.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Games can also provide Freedom of Choice after gameplay has finished. One way, which is common in racing games
such as the Need for Speed Series and fighting games such as the Tekken Series, is to allow players to view Replays to
support Bragging or Strategic Planning for the next game. Games that support Strategic Planning can encourage this
further through letting players of a specific game instance have Perfect Information or God Views so they can study it
to draw conclusions on how to play next time; something which can be especially valuable if the game
had Asymmetric Information during gameplay. This feature is available for free in non-mediated Self-Facilitated
Games but can also be supported in mediated games through Free Game Element Manipulation. Another design
possibility is to allow players to send Trans-Game Information after some particular gameplay has finished. Two
examples of this is allowing the sharing of Player Created Game Elements, e.g. Levels, or Gameplay Recordings. These
can often be achieved by dedicated players regardless of the design, e.g. through using third-party level editors or
simply videotaping the gameplay, but designers have the option to support these features within the game (as for
example the Advance Wars series for Levels as Player Created Game Elements, Battlefield 2 for Gameplay Recording,
and the Sim series for both). Internal Conflicts are a way of modifying Freedom of Choice so that it is bounded and
ensure that at least some action or goal is selected.
The removal of Freedom of Choice can occur for several different reasons. In Multiplayer Games with Turn Taking it is
a necessity and typically accepted on fairness grounds (as long as Analysis Paralysis doesn't occur). Other typical
reasons include Cut Scenes to advance in Narration Structures or the need for Excise to update the game state.
Diegetic Aspects
From a representational point of view, many games let players do Avatar Personalization and customize
their Handles to change how they will appear to themselves and other players. This Freedom of Choice can
help Coordination through Diegetically Outstanding Features and may be needed to High Score Lists to be
meaningful, but also provides a Possibility of Anonymity. This is typically part of Initial Personalization but can be
possible during gameplay also, and can in the latter case either be unrelated to the game state or part of the game
mechanics. For example, in the Sims series the appearance of the players‘ sims can be changed during any point of
the gameplay while in Fallout 3 changes in hair styles are done by visiting certain establishments and more radical
changes in facial characteristics is part of the Rewards for solving a specific mission (in the latter example
the Freedom of Choice regarding Avatar Personalization maintains the Diegetic Consistency).
Freedom of Choice, cont
Using the pattern, cont.
Interface Aspects
Since all actions players can do in a game needs to be accessible through its interface, a game with more Freedom of
Choice requires more extensive interface and thereby makes it more difficult to make it easy to use. An exception to
this is games with Self-Facilitated Games with Game Masters such as Roleplaying games since the Game Masters can
on the fly interpret the actions players wishes to perform.
Narrative Aspects
Besides the problems of having Narration Structures co-existing with Freedom of Choice on a gameplay level, the
more Freedom of Choice exists that effects the narration of a game the more resources need to be devoted to that
narration.
Consequences
Freedom of Choice lets players plan their actions and thereby promotes Stimulated Planning, either Tactical
Planning during gameplay or Strategic Planning before and after. As one example, Freedom of Choice in conjunction
with Character Development leads to additional freedom regarding Player-Planned Character Development. The
planning typically requires that the players imagines themselves as playing which provides Immersion,
especially Cognitive Immersion but also Emotional Immersion since Freedom of Choice gives players Empowerment.
Being able to choose between different actions or goals can support Varied Gameplay if the actions require different
skill sets or make it possible to create different strategies. When the Freedom of Choice causes players to have
Asymmetric Abilities, it can promote Replayability of the game.
The presence of Freedom of Choice can also have negative connotations for players, in the form of Social
Dilemmas and forcing them to make Tradeoffs and Risk/Reward choices. This occurs when all choices have some
negative effects associated with them, regardless of their positive effects. Regardless of any negative effect on the
game state of a player, Freedom of Choice in Multiplayer Games can cause Analysis Paralysis, and thereby still have
effects which are experienced as negative by others players.
Freedom of Choice, cont
Consequences, cont.
Players' Freedom of Choice can affect their Determinable Chance to Succeed with actions both positively and
negatively; while having many possible actions and seeing how they can lead to a goal leads to an increased
perception of how likely one is to succeed, having many choices without clear views on how they can directly help
one pursue a goal can instead be confusing. Similarly, the possibility to make choices can effect Exaggerated
Perception of Influence. Having more choices is an easy way to make it at least seem as one has greater possibilities
to help shape the outcome of the gameplay, but even gamebooks[4], which have Predetermined Story Structures and
very limited choices, provide a sense of influence the first time a certain story structure is explored since readers can
have goals on how the story should unfold.
Asymmetric Goals are the typical effect of allowing players to choose goals in Multiplayer Games.
Relations
Can Instantiate
Analysis Paralysis, Asymmetric Goals, Cognitive Immersion, Determinable Chance to Succeed, Emotional
Immersion, Empowerment, Exaggerated Perception of Influence, Immersion, Player-Planned Character
Development, Producers, Replayability, Risk/Reward,Social Dilemmas, Strategic Planning, Stimulated
Planning, Tactical Planning, Tradeoffs, Units, Varied Gameplay
Can Modulate
Avatars, Avatar Personalization, Character Development, Characters, Handles, Extended Actions, Predetermined Story
Structures, Randomness, Spawning, Units
Freedom of Choice, cont
Relations, cont.
Can Be Instantiated By
Achievements, Actions Have Diegetically Social Consequences, Activity Blending, Aim &
Shoot, Alarms, Alliances, Betting, Bidding, Character Creation, Collecting, Combat, Construction, Creative
Control, Difficulty Settings, Drop-In/Drop-Out, Enemies, Extra-Game Actions, Free Game Element Manipulation, Game
Masters, Game Pauses, Game Time Manipulation, Game World Navigation, Gameplay Recording, Heterogeneous Game
Element Ownership, Initial Personalization, Interruptibility, Investments, Maneuvering,Movement, Multiplayer
Games, Negotiation, No-Ops, Optional Goals, Optional Rules, Persistent Game Worlds, Player-Planned Character
Development, Player Created Game Elements, Player Decided Results, Player Decided Rule Setup, Player-Decided
Distribution of Rewards & Penalties, Player Defined Goals, Replays, Rerolls, Resource
Management, Reversibility, Risk/Reward, Roleplaying, Save-Load Cycles, Selectable Sets of Goals, Self-Facilitated
Games, Social Interaction, Storytelling, Strategic Planning, Tactical Planning, Tick-Based Games, Tools, Trading, TransGame Information, Traps
Can Be Modulated By
Ability Losses, Collaborative Actions, Decreased Abilities, Determinable Chance to Succeed, Exaggerated Perception of
Influence, Extended Actions, God Views, Improved Abilities, Inaccessible Areas, Internal Conflicts, Irreversible
Events, Limited Planning Ability,Movement Limitations, New Abilities, Perfect Information, Predefined
Goals, Predetermined Story Structures, Ultra-Powerful Events
Possible Closure Effects
Cut Scenes, Excise
Potentially Conflicting With
Enforced Agent Behavior, Game Mastery, Narration Structures, Predetermined Story Structures, Zero-Player Games
History
An updated version of the pattern Freedom of Choice that was part of the original collection in the book Patterns in
Game Design[5].
Freedom of Choice, cont
References
↑ Costikyan, G. (2005). I Have No Words & I Must Design: Toward a Critical Vocabulary for Games. Proceedings of
Computer Games and Digital Cultures Conference, ed. Frans Mäyrä. Tampere University Press
↑ Serious Games, Viking Press, 1970, p. 6, ISBN 0670634905.
↑ Sjöblom, B. (2008). The Relevance of Rules: Negotiations and Accounts in Co-operative and Co-located Computer
Gaming. Proceedings of the [player] conference, IT University of Copenhagen, August 26-29, 2008, pp. 335-378.
↑ Wikipedia entry for gamebooks.
↑ Björk, S. & Holopainen, J. (2004) Patterns in Game Design. Charles River Media. ISBN1-58450-354-8.
The Pattern Collection


~300 patterns described and
cross-referenced
New patterns







Objects in MMOGs ~50
Gameplay features in MMOGs
~15
Pervasive Games ~70
NPCs ~20
Aesthetical patterns ~20
Social Media Games ~15
Currently updated on a wiki*

gameplaydesignpatterns.org
Advantages of Design Patterns

Allow definitions of “fuzzy” concepts

Allow network of relations between the concepts

Allow perspectives for both analysis and design

Allow different levels of abstraction

Do not require specific methods

Specific or own collection of design patterns can be created

Describe games from a systems (or structural) perspective
47/42
Disadvantages of Design Patterns





“Fuzzy” concepts
Large collection
Learning curve
Usability threshold
Developed only for
gameplay design


Not all design disciplines
needed to make a game
Does not describe games
from the players’
perspective

Is this bad?
48/42
Design Patterns – Current Status

Large collection


~300 patterns described and cross-referenced
~100 new patterns to be incorporated






for
for
for
for
for
objects in MMOGs
gameplay features in MMOGs
Pervasive Games
Character design
Dialogue Systems in Games
New version being developed on a semi-public wiki:


Patterns
Patterns
Patterns
Patterns
Patterns
www.gameplaydesignpatterns.org
Both an approach to gameplay design and a specific
collection
49/42
Exercise: What design
patterns exist in Tetris?
Not a quiz on the patterns
identified by Björk & Holopainen!
How does design patterns
support analyzing games?
Designing games?
Using Analytical Tools
52
Using Analytical Tools

Supports methodical work




Support having complete overview
Allows finding anomalies
Ease use of being objective
Supports shared understanding

Helps readers understand


Common vocabulary
About using Tools

Do not solve problem by simply applying them


Support first (mechanical) comparison
Requires a focus by the tool users

Goal or hypothesis
53/42
Accessibility of the Tools

Most available online


Links from course homepage
For patterns


Ask Staffan
But you might as well create your own mini
collection highlighting 2-3 main patterns

Especially for the assignments in this course!
54/42
Regarding Assignment 2



Mandatory to identify gameplay design
patterns ideas
But find your own suggestions for patterns
Suggestion: use the component framework
to make a comprehensive search of the
games

But do not include all these patterns thus found
since only a few are relevant to your question
Thank you!
Questions?
56