{"id":29,"date":"2020-01-05T20:11:50","date_gmt":"2020-01-05T20:11:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/chapter\/quality-of-decision-making\/"},"modified":"2023-06-07T17:37:58","modified_gmt":"2023-06-07T17:37:58","slug":"quality-of-decision-making","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/chapter\/quality-of-decision-making\/","title":{"raw":"Quality of Decision-Making","rendered":"Quality of Decision-Making"},"content":{"raw":"<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">As Costikyan pointed out in\u00a0<em>I Have No Words<\/em>, we often use the buzzword \u201cinteractivity\u201d when describing games when we actually mean \u201cdecision-making.\u201d Decisions are, in essence, what players\u00a0<em>do<\/em> in a game. Remove all decisions and you have a movie or some other linear activity, not a game. There are two important exceptions, activities which have no decisions at all but we still use the word \"game\" to describe them: some children\u2019s games and some gambling games. For gambling games, it makes sense that a lack of decisions is tolerable. The \u201cfun\u201d of the game comes from the thrill of possibly winning or losing large sums of money; remove that aspect and most gambling games that lack decisions suddenly lose their charm. At home when playing only for chips, you\u2019re going to play games like <em>Blackjack<\/em>\u00a0or\u00a0<em>Poker<\/em>\u00a0that have real decisions in them; you are probably not going to play\u00a0<em>Craps<\/em> or a slot machine without money being involved.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">You might wonder, what is it about children\u2019s games that allow them to be completely devoid of decisions? We\u2019ll get to that in a bit.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Other than those two exceptions, most games have some manner of decision-making, and it is here that a game can be made more or less interesting. Sid Meier has been quoted as saying that a good game is a series of interesting decisions (or something like that), and there is some truth there. But what makes a decision \u201cinteresting\u201d?\u00a0<em>Battleship<\/em>\u00a0is a game that has plenty of decisions but is not particularly interesting for most adults; why not? What makes the decisions in\u00a0<em>Settlers of Catan<\/em>\u00a0more interesting than\u00a0<em>Monopoly<\/em>? Most importantly, how can you design your own games to have decisions that are actually compelling?<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><strong>Things Not To Do<\/strong><\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Before describing good kinds of decisions, it is worth explaining some common kinds of\u00a0<strong>uninteresting\u00a0<\/strong>decisions commonly found in games. Note that the terminology here (obvious, meaningless, blind) is my own, and is not \u201cofficial\u201d game industry jargon. At least not yet.<\/p>\n\n<ul>\n \t<li><strong>Meaningless decisions<\/strong> are perhaps the worst kind: there is a choice to be made, but it has no effect on gameplay. If you can play either of two cards but both cards are identical, that\u2019s not really much of a choice. These are also sometimes called <em>hollow decisions<\/em>.<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Obvious decisions<\/strong>\u00a0at least have an effect on the game, but there is clearly one right answer, so it\u2019s not really much of a choice. Most of the time, the number of dice to roll in the board game\u00a0<em>RISK<\/em>\u00a0falls into this category; if you are attacking with 3 or more armies, you have a \u201cdecision\u201d of whether to roll 1, 2, or 3 dice\u2026 but your odds are better rolling all 3, so it\u2019s not much of a decision except in very special cases. A more subtle example would be a game like\u00a0<em>Trivial Pursuit<\/em>. Each turn you are given a trivia question, and if you know the correct answer it could be said that you have a decision: say the right answer, or not. Except that there\u2019s never any reason to\u00a0<em>not<\/em>\u00a0say the right answer if you know it. The fun of the game comes from showing off your mastery of trivia, not from making any brilliant strategic maneuvers. This is also, I think, why quiz shows like\u00a0<em>Jeopardy!<\/em>\u00a0are more fun to watch than to play.<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Blind decisions<\/strong> have an effect on the game, and the answer is not obvious, but there is now an additional problem: the players do not have sufficient knowledge on which to make the decision, so it is essentially random, a guess rather than a decision. Playing <em>Rock-Paper-Scissors<\/em> against a truly random opponent falls into this category; your choice affects the outcome of the game, but you have no way of knowing what to choose. These are also sometimes called <em>uninformed decisions<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">These kinds of decisions are, by and large, not much fun. They are not particularly interesting. All three represent a waste of a player\u2019s time. Meaningless decisions could be eliminated, obvious decisions could be automated, and blind decisions could be randomized without affecting the outcome of the game at all.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">In this context, it is suddenly easy to see why so many games are not particularly compelling.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><strong>What Makes Good Decisions?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Now that we know what makes\u00a0<em>weak\u00a0<\/em>decisions, the easiest answer is \u201cdon\u2019t do that!\u201d But we can take it a little further. Generally,\u00a0<em>interesting<\/em>\u00a0decisions involve some kind of\u00a0<strong>tradeoff<\/strong>. That is, you are giving up one thing in exchange for another. These can take many different forms. Here are a few examples (again I use my own invented terminology here):<\/p>\n\n<ul>\n \t<li><strong>Resource trades<\/strong>. You give one thing up in exchange for another, where both are valuable. Which is\u00a0<em>more<\/em>\u00a0valuable? This is a value judgment, and the player\u2019s ability to correctly judge or anticipate value is what determines the game\u2019s outcome.<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Risk versus reward<\/strong>. One choice is safe. The other choice has a potentially greater payoff, but also a higher risk of failure. Whether you choose safe or dangerous depends partly on how desperate a position you\u2019re in, and partly on your analysis of just\u00a0<em>how<\/em>\u00a0safe or dangerous it is. The outcome is determined by your choice, plus a little luck\u2026 but over a sufficient number of choices, the luck can even out and the more skillful player will generally win. (Corollary: if you want more luck in your game, reduce the total number of decisions.)<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Choice of actions<\/strong>. You have several potential things you can do, but you can\u2019t do them all. The player must choose the actions that they feel are the most important at the time.<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Short term versus long term<\/strong>. You can have something right now, or something better later on. The player must balance immediate needs against long-term goals.<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Social information<\/strong>. In games where bluffing, deal-making and backstabbing are allowed, players must choose between playing honestly or dishonestly. Dishonesty may let you come out better on the current deal, but may make other players less likely to deal with you in the future. In the right (or wrong) game, backstabbing your opponents may have very negative real-world consequences.<\/li>\n \t<li><strong>Dilemmas<\/strong>. You must give up one of several things. Which one can you most afford to lose?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Notice the common thread here. All of these decisions involve the player judging the value of something, where values are shifting, not always certain, and not obvious.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">The next time you play a game that you really like, think about what kinds of decisions you are making. If you have a particular game that you strongly\u00a0<em>dis<\/em>like, think about the decisions being made there, too. You may find something about yourself, in terms of the kinds of decisions that you enjoy making.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><strong>Emotional Decisions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">There is one class of decisions that is useful to consider: decisions that have an emotional impact on the player. The decision of whether to save your buddy (while using some of your precious supplies) or leave him behind to die (potentially denying yourself some AI-assisted help later on) in\u00a0<em>Far Cry<\/em>\u00a0is a resource decision, but it is also meant to be an emotional one \u2013 and certainly, an identical decision made on a real-life battlefield would come down to more than just an analysis of available resources and probabilities. Likewise, the majority of players do not play through a game with moral choices (such as\u00a0<em>Knights of the Old Republic<\/em>\u00a0or\u00a0<em>Fable<\/em>) as pure evil \u2013 not because \u201cevil\u201d is a suboptimal strategy, but because even in a fictional simulated world, a lot of people can\u2019t stomach the thought of torturing and killing innocent bystanders.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Or consider a common decision made at the start of many board games: what color are you? Color is usually just a way to uniquely identify player tokens on the board, and has no effect on gameplay. However, many people have a favorite color that they always play, and can become quite emotionally attached to \u201ctheir\u201d color. It can be rather entertaining when two players who \u201calways\u201d play Green, play together for the first time and start arguing over who gets to be Green. If player color has no effect on gameplay, it is a meaningless decision. It\u00a0<em>should<\/em>\u00a0therefore be uninteresting, and yet some players paradoxically find it quite meaningful. The reason is that they are emotionally invested in the outcome. This is not to say that you can cover up a bad game by artificially adding emotions; but rather, as a designer, be aware of what decisions your players seem to respond to on an emotional level.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><span style=\"font-size: 8pt\">This chapter was adapted from <a href=\"https:\/\/gamedesignconcepts.wordpress.com\/2009\/07\/20\/level-7-decision-making-and-flow-theory\/\">Level 7<\/a> of Ian Schreiber's <em>Game Design Concepts<\/em> course.<\/span><\/p>","rendered":"<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">As Costikyan pointed out in\u00a0<em>I Have No Words<\/em>, we often use the buzzword \u201cinteractivity\u201d when describing games when we actually mean \u201cdecision-making.\u201d Decisions are, in essence, what players\u00a0<em>do<\/em> in a game. Remove all decisions and you have a movie or some other linear activity, not a game. There are two important exceptions, activities which have no decisions at all but we still use the word &#8220;game&#8221; to describe them: some children\u2019s games and some gambling games. For gambling games, it makes sense that a lack of decisions is tolerable. The \u201cfun\u201d of the game comes from the thrill of possibly winning or losing large sums of money; remove that aspect and most gambling games that lack decisions suddenly lose their charm. At home when playing only for chips, you\u2019re going to play games like <em>Blackjack<\/em>\u00a0or\u00a0<em>Poker<\/em>\u00a0that have real decisions in them; you are probably not going to play\u00a0<em>Craps<\/em> or a slot machine without money being involved.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">You might wonder, what is it about children\u2019s games that allow them to be completely devoid of decisions? We\u2019ll get to that in a bit.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Other than those two exceptions, most games have some manner of decision-making, and it is here that a game can be made more or less interesting. Sid Meier has been quoted as saying that a good game is a series of interesting decisions (or something like that), and there is some truth there. But what makes a decision \u201cinteresting\u201d?\u00a0<em>Battleship<\/em>\u00a0is a game that has plenty of decisions but is not particularly interesting for most adults; why not? What makes the decisions in\u00a0<em>Settlers of Catan<\/em>\u00a0more interesting than\u00a0<em>Monopoly<\/em>? Most importantly, how can you design your own games to have decisions that are actually compelling?<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><strong>Things Not To Do<\/strong><\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Before describing good kinds of decisions, it is worth explaining some common kinds of\u00a0<strong>uninteresting\u00a0<\/strong>decisions commonly found in games. Note that the terminology here (obvious, meaningless, blind) is my own, and is not \u201cofficial\u201d game industry jargon. At least not yet.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Meaningless decisions<\/strong> are perhaps the worst kind: there is a choice to be made, but it has no effect on gameplay. If you can play either of two cards but both cards are identical, that\u2019s not really much of a choice. These are also sometimes called <em>hollow decisions<\/em>.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Obvious decisions<\/strong>\u00a0at least have an effect on the game, but there is clearly one right answer, so it\u2019s not really much of a choice. Most of the time, the number of dice to roll in the board game\u00a0<em>RISK<\/em>\u00a0falls into this category; if you are attacking with 3 or more armies, you have a \u201cdecision\u201d of whether to roll 1, 2, or 3 dice\u2026 but your odds are better rolling all 3, so it\u2019s not much of a decision except in very special cases. A more subtle example would be a game like\u00a0<em>Trivial Pursuit<\/em>. Each turn you are given a trivia question, and if you know the correct answer it could be said that you have a decision: say the right answer, or not. Except that there\u2019s never any reason to\u00a0<em>not<\/em>\u00a0say the right answer if you know it. The fun of the game comes from showing off your mastery of trivia, not from making any brilliant strategic maneuvers. This is also, I think, why quiz shows like\u00a0<em>Jeopardy!<\/em>\u00a0are more fun to watch than to play.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Blind decisions<\/strong> have an effect on the game, and the answer is not obvious, but there is now an additional problem: the players do not have sufficient knowledge on which to make the decision, so it is essentially random, a guess rather than a decision. Playing <em>Rock-Paper-Scissors<\/em> against a truly random opponent falls into this category; your choice affects the outcome of the game, but you have no way of knowing what to choose. These are also sometimes called <em>uninformed decisions<\/em>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">These kinds of decisions are, by and large, not much fun. They are not particularly interesting. All three represent a waste of a player\u2019s time. Meaningless decisions could be eliminated, obvious decisions could be automated, and blind decisions could be randomized without affecting the outcome of the game at all.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">In this context, it is suddenly easy to see why so many games are not particularly compelling.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><strong>What Makes Good Decisions?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Now that we know what makes\u00a0<em>weak\u00a0<\/em>decisions, the easiest answer is \u201cdon\u2019t do that!\u201d But we can take it a little further. Generally,\u00a0<em>interesting<\/em>\u00a0decisions involve some kind of\u00a0<strong>tradeoff<\/strong>. That is, you are giving up one thing in exchange for another. These can take many different forms. Here are a few examples (again I use my own invented terminology here):<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Resource trades<\/strong>. You give one thing up in exchange for another, where both are valuable. Which is\u00a0<em>more<\/em>\u00a0valuable? This is a value judgment, and the player\u2019s ability to correctly judge or anticipate value is what determines the game\u2019s outcome.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Risk versus reward<\/strong>. One choice is safe. The other choice has a potentially greater payoff, but also a higher risk of failure. Whether you choose safe or dangerous depends partly on how desperate a position you\u2019re in, and partly on your analysis of just\u00a0<em>how<\/em>\u00a0safe or dangerous it is. The outcome is determined by your choice, plus a little luck\u2026 but over a sufficient number of choices, the luck can even out and the more skillful player will generally win. (Corollary: if you want more luck in your game, reduce the total number of decisions.)<\/li>\n<li><strong>Choice of actions<\/strong>. You have several potential things you can do, but you can\u2019t do them all. The player must choose the actions that they feel are the most important at the time.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Short term versus long term<\/strong>. You can have something right now, or something better later on. The player must balance immediate needs against long-term goals.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Social information<\/strong>. In games where bluffing, deal-making and backstabbing are allowed, players must choose between playing honestly or dishonestly. Dishonesty may let you come out better on the current deal, but may make other players less likely to deal with you in the future. In the right (or wrong) game, backstabbing your opponents may have very negative real-world consequences.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Dilemmas<\/strong>. You must give up one of several things. Which one can you most afford to lose?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Notice the common thread here. All of these decisions involve the player judging the value of something, where values are shifting, not always certain, and not obvious.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">The next time you play a game that you really like, think about what kinds of decisions you are making. If you have a particular game that you strongly\u00a0<em>dis<\/em>like, think about the decisions being made there, too. You may find something about yourself, in terms of the kinds of decisions that you enjoy making.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><strong>Emotional Decisions<\/strong><\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">There is one class of decisions that is useful to consider: decisions that have an emotional impact on the player. The decision of whether to save your buddy (while using some of your precious supplies) or leave him behind to die (potentially denying yourself some AI-assisted help later on) in\u00a0<em>Far Cry<\/em>\u00a0is a resource decision, but it is also meant to be an emotional one \u2013 and certainly, an identical decision made on a real-life battlefield would come down to more than just an analysis of available resources and probabilities. Likewise, the majority of players do not play through a game with moral choices (such as\u00a0<em>Knights of the Old Republic<\/em>\u00a0or\u00a0<em>Fable<\/em>) as pure evil \u2013 not because \u201cevil\u201d is a suboptimal strategy, but because even in a fictional simulated world, a lot of people can\u2019t stomach the thought of torturing and killing innocent bystanders.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\">Or consider a common decision made at the start of many board games: what color are you? Color is usually just a way to uniquely identify player tokens on the board, and has no effect on gameplay. However, many people have a favorite color that they always play, and can become quite emotionally attached to \u201ctheir\u201d color. It can be rather entertaining when two players who \u201calways\u201d play Green, play together for the first time and start arguing over who gets to be Green. If player color has no effect on gameplay, it is a meaningless decision. It\u00a0<em>should<\/em>\u00a0therefore be uninteresting, and yet some players paradoxically find it quite meaningful. The reason is that they are emotionally invested in the outcome. This is not to say that you can cover up a bad game by artificially adding emotions; but rather, as a designer, be aware of what decisions your players seem to respond to on an emotional level.<\/p>\n<p data-adtags-visited=\"true\"><span style=\"font-size: 8pt\">This chapter was adapted from <a href=\"https:\/\/gamedesignconcepts.wordpress.com\/2009\/07\/20\/level-7-decision-making-and-flow-theory\/\">Level 7<\/a> of Ian Schreiber&#8217;s <em>Game Design Concepts<\/em> course.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"menu_order":4,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-29","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":24,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/11"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29\/revisions\/30"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/24"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=29"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=29"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.usnh.edu\/creatinggames\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=29"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}