WIRED by Design: A Game Designer Explains the Counterintuitive Secret to Fun

CONNECT WITH WIRED


WIRED by Design: A Game Designer Explains the Counterintuitive Secret to Fun

Producer: Editor in Chief - Scott Dadich, Creative Director - Billy Sorrentino, and Senior Producer - Sowjanya Kudva
Editor: Junho Kim

[Flyborg]

The fact that someone hasn't created a top-tier successful game does not mean they don't have valuable insights; likewise, someone who has created a classic may not be aware of what made it good. And the talk isn't fun, but the talk isn't a game, so that's fine too. That being said, here are what I thought were some interesting ideas from the talk:

*Games must limit you in some ways but not others. (If you have zero control, you're not playing a game: you're watching a show. If you have total control, you're not playing a game: you're drawing on a blank sheet of paper.)
*Games are "the voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles"
*Fun means "deliberately manipulating a familiar situation in a new way"
*In order to have fun with a game, you must "respect" it and take it seriously - despite the fact that this seems like an absurd thing to do.
*"Fun comes from the attention and care you bring to something that offers enough freedom of movement - enough _play_ - that such attention _matters_."
*Meta-commentary: This seems most applicable to "core games" that focus on a skill-based challenge, as opposed to social games, pure immersion games, etc.

[crazyMLC]

He makes a really good point. You only have fun with a game when it takes itself seriously, when it's consistent, when it earns your respect. Or, as I interpreted it, you only have fun with a game when you love it. And that sounds really obvious to say, but it's an important thing to think about. You have to love your game while you make it if you hope for others to do the same. You have to respect it.

[TheRhetoricGamer]

I believe the takeaway here is that you can't just slap some gameplay together and expect it to be fun. Making a game fun requires attention to detail and having the game take itself seriously in delivering an experience.

[paulstaker]

What's up there: A meaningful and educated lecture.
What's down here: Absolute sewage.

[Xsomono]

I'd phrase it a little easier: There is joy in progress which can be made by discovering, learning and then using your experience to grow. Then fun is the feeling you get when you watch yourself growing.

[boredom]

It takes stupid dedication to something to do anything worthwhile to with it. All the grumpy commenters before me seem to be missing that this is an academic discussion and that it's not designed to be a spectacle by itself. It's informative.

[officialtechin]

Contrary to a great number of comments here, I found this talk entertaining. It was informative, well presented and MORE THAN TOLERABLE.

Ok this talk is not 'fun', at least not directly. But come on, he's a great speaker. Pauses, hand gestures etc - and above all else he speaks clearly and doesn't stutter. Also entertainment can hinder recall. Pretty well done.

[SonicXRage]

He's right. You only have fun when you take something seriously. I've noticed that in my own life.

[DownwardsRising]

Yes! Manual transmissions are fun, even though they're difficult. When I heard him say that he got all the cred he needed in my mind.

[LiveFirstToInfinity]

I thought it was Gilfoyle for a second.

[JonathanTash]

Ian is a genius. The talk is all it took to make me look him up, find his book, "Play Anything"", and buy it.

[workbased]

That was literally more educational than my Games Tech course at uni.

[thbyg]

"...enough play..." I never thought about those two meanings of "play" together. That's fascinating.

[aikighost]

His description of "fun" sounds like my description of learning a craft.

[southoceann]

That was an amazing and inspiring talk! And I am so happy that you kept it concise, not dragging the audience through 20 min of talking to get a strong point across. Much respect for you sir Ian. Thank you again for the talk!

[jmiquelmb]

This guy makes a very good point regarding how much of a poor idea of what fun is we have. Creativity, challenge are the core elements of fun. The coffee example is perfect for anyone who is a coffee aficionado, pouring a good shot is a mild inconvenience that makes mornings less boring because unlike the most of the morning routine it has challenge and self expression. I do this kind of stupid stuff he mentions all the time. If I’m making some tea and toast with butter and jam I try to come up with optimal paths: how to brew the tea so it’s at the right temp when everything is finished, when the toast should be made so it’s not hot enough to liquify the butter, when the butter should be taken out of the fridge so it’s soft. It may seem mental to other people but it’s a mental stimulus to an otherwise boring routine.

[VladyVeselinov]

This is probably the greatest talk I've seen in the last year, awesome Ian!

[kevinfishburne]

Fun isn't finding the logical conclusion of good gameplay. It's discovery through play, or the enjoyment of a logical, internally-consistent system with elements of chaos through AI or another player. Liked the presentation though.

[Dunam]

if this guy was an expert at fun, why didn't he add fun to his talk? Checkmate atheists.

[themarveluniverseonline]

In games, it's risk vs reward. Any enjoyable task can feel like a chore if the reward for success does not equal the effort needed to reach it. Even this is a variable based on how much the player is invested in the genre, if you love superheroes, you will accept more difficult tasks with more moderate rewards, but again even then, that is tenuous. Fun is anything that you want to do in life, aside from the things you have to do in life