How Gameplay Loops Keep You Playing

Also I lied the link to my patreon is in the comments, sike!

The Architect isn't the only person out there with a steadily growing backlog of games that's impossible to ever finish- and despite that, they still go back to the same old games time and time again, but what makes a game compelling, and what makes us get bored of a title long before we've finished it?

The answer, is gameplay loops, a foundational game design trick designed to keep you playing for longer, but that's not always a good thing.

You Saw:

Starcraft 2 - 2010
Frostpunk- 2018
Astroneer- 2019
Grim Dawn- 2016
Deus Ex: Mankind Divided- 2016
Steamworld Dig 2- 2017
Transistor- 2014
Hades- Early Access
Destiny 2- 2017
Steamworld Quest- 2019
Wandersong- 2018
Pyre- 2017
Super Mario 64- 1996
Doom- 1993
DOOM- 2016
New Super Luigi Bros U- 2014
A Hat in Time- 2017
Jamestown- 2011
Furi- 2016
Bayonetta- 2009
Total Warhammer 2- 2017
Final Fantasy 6- 1996
Dark Souls- 2012
Sunless Skies- 2019
The Hex- 2018
Far Cry 3- 2012
The Lenged of Zelda: Breath of the Wild- 2016
Far Cry 5- 2018
Super Paper Mario- 2007
Pokemon Ultra Sun- 2017
Pokemon Fire Red- 2004
Pikmin- 2001
Factorio- Early Access (technically)
Devil Daggers- 2016
Bad Rats- 2007
Clash Royale- 2016
Candy Crush- 2012
Bejeweled 3- 2010
Sonic Adventure 2- 2001
Rimworld- 2016
Her Story- 2016
Ai War 2- 2019

[Lishtenbird]

* slaps game *

it fit many lööps, brøther

[allenl]

Huh... maybe that's why I spent so much time on Skyrim yet struggle to find anything I really enjoyed about that game.

[danielg]

I feel like this explains my experience with immersive sims. I look back on System Shock, its sequel, Bioshocks 1 & 2, and the dlc's to infinite pretty fondly, but I can't go back to them as easily as say Minecraft or a level-based shooter because they're very involved games. I couldn't just put in a little bit of time to enjoy them, whereas the more minutely freeform structure of Minecraft or the snappiness of a shooter level makes them easier to pick back up and play.

[JoshBurcham]

11:48 a million crappy games wanting to steal your time and money *unrelated footage of sonic*

[herraperunarutto]

Someone who sounds exactly like adam killed him and took over the channel. How do I know? He didn't speak about xcom 2.

[osten]

Great video as always, I appreciate it a lot!


I have a few pointers if you want them.
"Gameplay loops", "Core game loop" etc. these terms are a way to dissect and analyze (often with the purpose of tuning) a game. It's not featured in varying "amounts" across games, instead all games have them. From a walking simulator to a predatory mobile game, it's technically not a game without having at least one (that would make it a movie). Think of it as a way of dividing your game you are looking at into sub sections of *modes of interaction*. The "sum" will always be 100%, so the reason we use them is mostly to identify how many there are, and which ones are supporting, which is the core, and then make sure that the core definitely is satisfying for the target audience, while the supporting ones generally can be used more freely for other things; control pacing or to hook players and so on.


You mentioned Destiny 2 for instance, this game relies on RPG mechanics, a progression system meant to support the shooting core. In the video, you make it sound like it's using loops to kind of distract you from the fact that you don't enjoy it, but that is only true if you don't personally enjoy the mechanics. The game was made to appeal to a shooter audience, and uses rpg progression in supporting loops to hook them. In the video you describe it as them "using" loops to make it addictive, but this effect comes solely from its progression system. You talk a lot about progression systems and addiction overall, but that is not an effect that comes from the "use" of game play loop analysis. The "use" of game play loop analysis, is to make sure your players spend time on what you want them to spend time on, and that can vary from game to game depending on core audience. For instance, having "worlds" or "levels" in your game, dividing it up, does not necessarily change the modes of interaction at all. It can have 8 or 12 worlds, and still involve the same core / supporting game play loops. The mode of interaction within a level is generally the core game loop and benefits like you said, from being integrated, learned by the player. Augmenting the core game loop with weapons or different mechanics on levels such as an ice level, is not necessarily a new game loop. On the other hand, the Total War series as you said has a clear boundary between strategy and tactics modes of interaction. Those are a good example of separate game play loops, one encompassing the other, supporting each other and creating something whole. But things like the bike level in battle toads, when suddenly the game is different, is an example where the core game loop is completely changed. These are the situations where the term is most useful to have. The consensus has moved generally towards the reasoning that a game should focus on it's core game loop and not split up the appeal too much. "Instead make a new game" is often heard in the corridors, when someone goes overboard with core game play loop changes. A good example where this went a bit sideways is Contra 3, when it suddenly and jarringly becomes a top down game. Yeah, that's splitting the core game loop (and the appeal) in two.


I'm not sure a consumer can use the understanding of game play loops to change if they enjoy a game or not, it's more up to developers to find the appropriate composition of game loops that fit their audience. Gameplay loops is a term used to segment modes of interaction, and it's better understood if we try to disassociate it with the actual mechanics and systems in the game, and also from enjoyment of a game, because enjoyment comes from a lot of things, loops can be every which way, but if the pacing is right players might still enjoy it. Hope that makes some sense, thanks for reading!

[Marcusaralius]

You... you just reminded me Factorio exists! I had so much stuff to get done today!

[gms]

Fantastic video! Had me thinking about things like Dark Souls' bonfire system, Fallout/Skyrim's "return to town to sell before you're overencumbered" pace, and Escape From Tarkov's raid design. This'll surely keep me thinking about what was previously an undefinable rhythm in games, that I now know is a definite piece of game design.

[deevee]

Hades is SO good.
What puts it above the competition, in my eyes, is the characters. SUPERGIANT always make interesting characters, great banter, fully voice their games, and make the story actually interesting.
That's why I keep coming back to their games. There's a lot of indie titles with great gameplay, but Supergiant just put their games above others in so many ways.

[Badguy]

So that's why I love Killing Floor! A medium gameplay loop of a 10-round match and the short gameplay loop being the rounds themselves, split up by small shopping breaks.

[kitthekat]

Thanks for the good design videos, I always love these!
It's because of you and Mark Brown that I now am a full time student in game design, and I love it.
Seriously. Big thanks!

[LimeyLassen]

I'm honestly in awe of your production of these videos. No one else puts in footage of like 40 different games just to illustrate a point. With sauce in the description, even.

[kiiyll]

I close Hades and open up YouTube and get recommended a video that makes me want to play Hades again lmao

[nacho]

Just now I'm playing through Persona 5...goddamn it's hard for me to rip myself away from the game. The loop is way too satisfying and so easy to do. I'm in love!

[lucasduque]

Gameplay loops are pretty sweet, but what about froot loops?

[kingofmane]

Awesome video as always. As a game dev, I really appreciate these types of videos. Would love to see more in-depth analyses of games using these principles though. It's great seeing quick examples in each video, but these could be supplemented with case studies of individual games in their own videos to help affirm the concepts presented. Keep up the awesome work!

[montenico]

The moral of the video: Appreciate the lööps, brøther
.

[cryoshakespeare]

Well, that was excellent and informative! I've gotten into Slay the Spire recently and man, I can really see how all this applies to it. You can get through one or two runs in a gaming session, and are pushed forward by the meta level goals of initially gaining new unlocks, and then eventually driving up your succession level as you improve.


Personally I design in the space of tabletop RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons, and I think there's a huge amount of this type of design to unravel there. Will be giving this some serious thought, thanks again!

[nazek]

Warframe is a good example of this. The main loop is the mission, one level with a clear objective that usually takes somewhere between 2 and 20 minutes. Smaller gameplay loops are the combat and movement, both of which are usually automated by your brain after a while. Larger loops are created by the grind; that is, you need to run multiple missions in order to get new warframes, weapons, mods, and other items. There are so many and such complicated systems that most players have a "macro" goal that might take weeks or months to achieve, split into smaller goals that might each take dozens of missions.

[remiauthier]

I would have loved to hear your take on how the loop works for Civilisation games. The addictive aspect of “one more turn” which can easily be ttanslated to “one more short loop” in order to reach a medium (tech) or big loop (conquering an ennemy). I guess you did address it but I think it might be the greatest loop game ever and has perfected the addictive nature of loops.