Search Unity

  1. Megacity Metro Demo now available. Download now.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Unity support for visionOS is now available. Learn more in our blog post.
    Dismiss Notice

How do you know if the game that you've designed is "fun"?

Discussion in 'Game Design' started by Ra1den, Nov 18, 2014.

  1. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    As we all know there is no one definition of fun that can encompass everyone's version
    of fun...Thus where my question is posed from, how do you know if the game that you've designed is "fun"?
    Are there some governing rules/hints to help guide you through? or do you just trust that your "fun" or the "fun"
    that you have instilled in your game/game design is something everyone will understand?

    Personally I draw from my experience of being a gamer and the countless number of games that i have
    played through out me life to help me with this (which i know isn't a very good idea and may create bad habits but it does have it's pros to it as well) though in the end i'm unsure on this topic.. What do you guys think?
     
  2. JasonBricco

    JasonBricco

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2013
    Posts:
    956
    I draw from experience. And the person I'm working with's experience.

    Obviously, not everyone shares my vision of fun. I don't think it's possible to find a game that will be fun for everyone... so I assume that if I think it's fun and if the person I'm working with thinks it's fun, then there will certainly be a group of people who will think it's fun.

    There's probably a lot more thought that can be put into it than that, but that's what I've been running off of so far!
     
  3. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Posts:
    2,981
    Have you watched someone play it? Find a member of your target audience, 'Would you mind testing my game? I just want to watch you play, please don't ask me any questions.' Give them the game, say nothing else, and watch them play. No excuses, no explanations. It's the butt-in-seat test.

    5-10 minutes of that will probably answer your original question and unless you're lucky, the answer will almost always feel like a NO. Which means more iterations to 'find the fun'.

    Gigi
     
    inafield, RJ-MacReady and Magiichan like this.
  4. RockoDyne

    RockoDyne

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2014
    Posts:
    2,234
    Give it to a person and ask if it sucks. Any response that isn't overwhelmingly positive means there is a lot to work on.
     
  5. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    I see... So you guys go full on practical (Make a working prototype as quickly as possible,post it out there and get feedback asap) but is that really feasible/doable for all game ideas? Aren't there some ideas that don't quite shine until they are complete? or is that just me? :D
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2014
    Gigiwoo and AndrewGrayGames like this.
  6. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    Also Yes, there maybe no universally accepted "fun" game but there are games that are close...How do games such as Mario become really popular to the point of inspiring an entire generation? while others fail to do so in anyway? what's in their design that makes a whole lot of us say "hey that looks like fun" ? (Okay i'm aware this may be partly another question lol)
     
  7. Kellyrayj

    Kellyrayj

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Posts:
    936
    Ask other gamers and developers. My friends generally don't give the best feedback because they want to be nice and are impressed that I even have something moving on the screen. Post your stuff here and ask for some genuine feedback.
     
  8. slay_mithos

    slay_mithos

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2014
    Posts:
    130
    Well, if your game needs to be feature complete to start being "fun", it means it's not.
    What I mean is that any of your mechanisms should be fun on their own, so that any part of your game would be too.

    As for friends, I have a few that won't hesitate to say if it sucks. Not quite nice for your feelings, but for feedback, it's great.
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  9. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,441
    I absolutely agree this is the case. All one needs to do is take a look at any of the tutorials about making games or dev logs of game developers to see it in action. Say you release your game and it has the player moving around an empty screen. Is that fun? Some people might think so. Most would likely say no. Maybe you wait until the player can also jump and perhaps you throw in some scenery. Is that fun? Probably a few more people would think so but again many would likely talk about how empty it is add some enemies or something. I do not agree with the whole "every part of the game should be fun". I mean sure it should be well executed. The walking. The jumping. Whatever. But there is no way anyone could judge that game's potential which turned out to be Halo or Diablo 3 or whatever just from that very early demo you threw out there.
     
  10. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    This.
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  11. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    I don't think that "complete" matters. There are certainly some where the prototyping takes ages, though.

    I'm currently working on two hobby projects. The larger one is heavily AI driven, and there's no point testing it on people until there's a base AI and an environment to test with. So that's taking ages (months*). The other one is a simple casual puzzle game. That got its first user feedback test two nights ago, after just a week and a half*.

    * In both cases these are spare time projects on the side of a full time job. They average probably getting equivalent effort per week to a day or a day and a half's full time work.
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  12. GarBenjamin

    GarBenjamin

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2013
    Posts:
    7,441
    That is true. I didn't catch the bit about "complete". Of course, the game does not need to be complete for people to play test it and understand your design goals. But like @angrypenguin said about prototyping... enough of your design needs to be implemented for people to experience it. Take basically any game and then imagine it with 90% of it gone. It could go in so many directions from that point it would be nearly impossible to judge it. All that can be judged is what is currently implemented and if enough is implemented then the play testers can probably figure out ah so there will be more stuff like this and more stuff like that. And so on.
     
    AndrewGrayGames, Ra1den and Gigiwoo like this.
  13. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    Yeah, the mechanics need to be in a playable form. Any aesthetics that don't impact the mechanic can (and should) go.
     
    AndrewGrayGames and Gigiwoo like this.
  14. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Posts:
    2,981
    Brilliant! If you want to know how to design more fun in your game, use the Feedback Friday threads!
    Gigi
     
    AndrewGrayGames and angrypenguin like this.
  15. screenname_taken

    screenname_taken

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Posts:
    663
    I'm giving it to people i trust that aren't afraid to tell me that it sucks.
    If the other person giggles when he/she dies and hits retry, i'm guessing that it's going ok.
     
  16. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    Whenever i want my friends or family to review something i make, I usually just say "Hey come check out this game i found..What do you think of it?" Just to get their 100% unfiltered opinion and as game designers we should be ready
    for all kinds of answers...

    Whhhich is easier said than done because trust me having one person bash your game is something but having an entire group bash something that you made is nothing but painful and sucks but still we have to find a way to take what they are saying and make something positive out of it...

    Now I do understand what you guys are saying, actually i'm not arguing with the fact that the practical route is arguably the best way to go but lets take an example of an indie success... Limbo

    Limbo despite it being simplistic in nature and game design was a huge hit and would have a simple prototype done it justice and fully describe what this game is supposed to be about?
     
  17. screenname_taken

    screenname_taken

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Posts:
    663
    I'm a bit lost on your two last lines. It starts being as a statement that turns into a question?
     
  18. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    In other words what i want to say is would have a game like limbo worked out if it went with the "practical" route we are describing right now? Would you have seen its appeal if you saw it first as nothing but a simple prototype? and that's my question...sorry for not being clear >.>
     
  19. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Posts:
    2,981
    What might it mean for a AAA to not test this way? "Well sir, we need another $80M to get a reasonably polished version, then we'll start letting people play it to see if we can find the fun!" Can't imagine it! Testing is an art, and a science and it happens early and often. There are vertical slices, horizontal slices, internals, butt-in-seat, prototypes, and more. Find the flaws and find the fun. Your early ideas are just clay, waiting to be molded into something beautiful. Iterate, iterate, iterate.

    Maybe it's a difference between a hobbyist and a professional. The hobbyist is hoping to maybe invent something fun. A professional expects success and is trying to improve their process for getting there.

    Gigi.
     
    AndrewGrayGames likes this.
  20. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    @Gigiwoo Ah okay! so what you're saying is that it's this continuous cycle of Iterating that leads us to great/successful games...right? :D
     
    AndrewGrayGames and Gigiwoo like this.
  21. AndrewGrayGames

    AndrewGrayGames

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2009
    Posts:
    3,821
    I think @Gigiwoo is totally right, based on my own personal experience.

    What I'm trying (with limited success) to do in my testing, is sort of the opposite of 'search for fun' - 'seek and remove pain.' The way I figure it, it gets really easy to put a game down, when the game itself doesn't allow you to have fun in the first place. A great example of this in my opinion is the game Lords of the Black Sun, a 4X game available on Steam. You may notice my review is right up top, and you may notice my complaints: ugly and obtrusive UI, uninspired setting, but generally awesome mechanics. You'd think the mechanics alone would sell the game - I can tell you from experience the fleet battles are awesome, and I'll defend that feature to the death - but, the UI gets in the way so much, that it's simply less painful to just not play that game.

    ...Except, it doesn't have to be a poorly-considered UI that injects lethal doses of pain. Does your game show or tell too much, instead of letting players do? Severe pain point. Does your game's control scheme or simulation aspect interfere with what the player is trying to do (e.g. unusually obtrusive physics, bad ruleset?) Severe pain point.

    It's easy to get people to put your game down, really. Just make it as hostile to their play as you possibly can. What's worse, you can make your game player-hostile without even realizing it. That's a set of problems I'm figuring out how to solve in my current project. But, you can only do that if you test and get people to play and tell you what they find wrong. It's amazing what problems you can solve, by asking in the first place.*

    *: As @Gigiwoo and various other veterans here keep telling me, it's even easier to get feedback by just giving someone the game and saying, 'Let me watch you play. I won't answer any questions, but it helps me if you ask them anyhow.' I'm trying to figure out a creative solution to that problem, because I can't just put up a computer with a pre-alpha version of my game in a Starbucks and say to passers-by, 'Hey wanna play an incomplete, probably completely horrible game?'
     
    imaginaryhuman, inafield and Gigiwoo like this.
  22. RJ-MacReady

    RJ-MacReady

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Posts:
    1,718
    Does your own enjoyment of the game serve as any indicator of whether or not you should let someone else try it at that stage?

    or are you as the developer typically biased?
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2014
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  23. superpig

    superpig

    Drink more water! Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Posts:
    4,649
    Playtest, for sure.

    Before that: I find the 'five minutes of gameplay' thought exercise to be very helpful.

    There are lots of game ideas that seem interesting, but when you really try to picture what a player would do, second-by-second, you realize that it boils down to 'spend 30 seconds walking from point A to point B, then watch a little cutscene/conversation, then spend another 30 seconds walking from B back to A, then watch another little cutscene/conversation,' etc.

    In particular, focus on the things the player needs to think about about the decisions they need to make. If all the player is doing is following instructions, it's likely to be boring. If the player is having to pick options at random, it's going to feel arbitrary. And so on.
     
    Ra1den, AndrewGrayGames and Gigiwoo like this.
  24. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Posts:
    2,981
    The 'Curse of Knowledge' is a powerful enemy. Often, while developing a game, the play still feels fun, cause you're doing more than just playing. You're checking that things are working! Is the text correct? Particles working? Performance okay? Those extra thoughts keep the experience fresh.

    Since you likely don't have two cameras or a recording studio, do it the old fashioned way - stand behind them and just watch. Quietly.

    Gigi
     
  25. RJ-MacReady

    RJ-MacReady

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Posts:
    1,718
    Thanks again, I don't waste advice. ;)
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  26. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    There's no one right way for all games. Limbo's main innovations were aesthetic, so its "practical approach" would have focused at least partly on that, perhaps with concept art, mocked up animations, so on and so forth.
     
  27. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    So you should focus on your game's strengths and try to project them as much as you can in the prototype?
     
  28. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    Sure. You should figure out where your innovation is, and focus your testing on that. If you're not innovating in a given area I'm a strong believer that you should let audience expectations guide you as much as possible, because you shouldn't let them get distracted from your point of difference by behaving counter to their expectations elsewhere.

    People pay attention to new things. Make sure your new things are where you want their attention. ;)
     
    Ra1den likes this.
  29. superpig

    superpig

    Drink more water! Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Posts:
    4,649
    For every prototype you make - and many games would see multiple prototypes of different aspects/styles/areas of the game - you should have some questions in mind that you're using the prototype to answer. Questions like "is X fun?" or "is Y too confusing for players to get?" or "do P and Q naturally get used as counterbalancing forces by players?" or "does this art style look good when animated?" Build your prototype with the question in mind - not only does it help you focus the prototype on the bare minimum of work required, but it makes you think about what your design actually is.

    If there are certain elements in your game that are really crucial to the design - major mechanics - then you're likely to have a lot of questions about them! You're going to want to check that they work in a bunch of different situations, and to explore the possibilities with them, and so on. Prototyping can be a good way to answer that. (Though it is not the only way - and what works in a prototype may still end up not working when you've assembled everything together. But you can still learn stuff from it).

    Ultimately, nothing is going to beat a flexible, iterative approach throughout the whole of production - you need to be able to get six months in, go 'you know what, this isn't fun,' tear down what you've got and start picking over the pieces to figure out what you can build from them that is fun. But prototyping in the pre-production phase can help to give you the knowledge to circumvent some of these mistakes before you make them.
     
  30. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    I think this is especially good advice worth quoting. So I quoted it. ;)
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  31. inafield

    inafield

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2013
    Posts:
    281
    In my experiences doing UX and other stuff is the anti-test. In this case, the responses of non-gamers. Developers are great at figuring things out (we're wired to solve, understand, and deconstruct), as are other super-gamers. If you can get a non-gamer to play your game without any instructions or interruptions from you... then you know the game is at least playable.
    • If you're lucky and they are honest, they'll give decent feedback.
    • If they are just being nice, they'll give the game back to you and let the next person play.
    • If they are legit and it is fun, they won't want to put it down and will tell you to stop bothering them while they are playing.
    People who don't like racing games but have fun playing a racing game... likely the game is fun. People who don't like card games but don't want to put the game down... it's likely fun.

    Just being honest about my own game: I don't know why my testers (all but one were non-gamers) have found it fun. They do, but I don't know why. That scares me just a bit.
     
    AndrewGrayGames likes this.
  32. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    Some really good advice here... Thanks guys! ^^

    EDIT: Ironically as much as people view game design as a creative process, it really is destructive too :p
     
  33. RJ-MacReady

    RJ-MacReady

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Posts:
    1,718
    @Asvarduil

    You could hook a 360 controller up to a laptop and start playing your game in the mall/starbucks, and if people look over your shoulder ask them if they want to try.

    I had a guy once ask if I wanted to do T-Shirt art and another guy asked if I wanted to do artwork for a children's book up in Starbucks. Things go down in Starbucks.

    Edit: This requires some social smoothness, though, a little humor and charm wouldn't hurt either. ;)
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2014
  34. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    I had that experience last night! I handed my girlfriend the controller with my casual puzzle game. The first-pass mechanics are all in aside from scoring and end conditions. She had been walking past to go elsewhere, but got distracted and played around with it for 20 minutes.
     
  35. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    AndrewGrayGames and angrypenguin like this.
  36. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    When I asked what she thought about scoring, she said she likes it without scoring. So it gave me the idea to make a "chill out" mode where it's more of a toy than a game.

    The best thing is, that feature is already finished! ;)
     
  37. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    @angrypenguin Okay now i need to see this game! Link to thread please! :D
     
    angrypenguin likes this.
  38. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    I've been thinking about getting something online to share when there's a bit more to it... I'll let you know if I do.
     
    GarBenjamin, Ra1den and inafield like this.
  39. superpig

    superpig

    Drink more water! Unity Technologies

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Posts:
    4,649
    Yep. The mark of a really good game designer is often more about knowing what to leave out rather than what to include. Especially when you've got team members coming to you throughout development saying "Wouldn't it be cool if..."
     
  40. PhobicGunner

    PhobicGunner

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Posts:
    1,813
    Yeah, my design professor used to say that the best design isn't the one where you add the most stuff, it's the simplest one you can get away with.
     
    inafield, Gigiwoo and angrypenguin like this.
  41. angrypenguin

    angrypenguin

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2011
    Posts:
    15,614
    Hell yeah.
     
  42. Wrymnn

    Wrymnn

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Posts:
    373
    How can you watch him play if he is mostly some other player from world?
     
    Gigiwoo likes this.
  43. Gigiwoo

    Gigiwoo

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Posts:
    2,981
    My son might call that a first-world-problem!
    Gigi
     
  44. RJ-MacReady

    RJ-MacReady

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Posts:
    1,718
    Build a basic playback recorder, and if Unity allows (probly do... never checked) save playbacks to your web server. Solved!
     
  45. der_r

    der_r

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2014
    Posts:
    259
    Having pretty blunt friends helps. ;)
     
  46. Wrymnn

    Wrymnn

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Posts:
    373
    hehe :)
     
  47. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    Aaand this is how privacy dies....One step at a time xD
     
  48. Immanuel-Scholz

    Immanuel-Scholz

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2013
    Posts:
    221
    I want to throw two points in, that I haven't seen when skimming over the answers:

    First, do you mean by "fun" that the player find something "funny"? I guess not. Take the example of "Limbo" that came up before: It is not so funny after all. I actually didn't really laugh when playing the game. Its more about enjoying the artwork and scenery. About exploring the mysterious setting. And about thinking through the logic puzzles.

    Yes, this seems like stupid nitpicking and just a matter of "definition". Probably most of the writers here will immediately shout: "Of course, by using 'fun' we meant that the player just somehow.. likes to play the game. That he ... enjoyed it. Or that he was engaged". You just define "having fun" as "everything that makes me like to play this game more" and be over with.

    But why not calling it "like", "joy" or "engagement" in the first place (which may be by themselfs different concepts). Choosing the vocabulary of "fun" starts to set you into the wrong mind, IMHO. Think first about "what is it REALLY that I want to find out that people think about my game". Do you want to make your audience laugh, cry, relaxed, feel ashamed, feel awesome? Or maybe you don't care how they think about your game as long as they buy it and all the DLC? All these require totally different ways of testing your approach... ;)


    Anyway.. next point I want to throw in: Not all games are about their game mechanics. Many are, but many aren't. If you want to replicate success for games like Limbo, Brothers: Tale of two Sons or Kentucky: Route Zero, then I guess you are doing a lot of art-testing as well. And these can impact the .... "fun" (as in "people wants to play your game") as much as game mechanics can do.
     
    inafield likes this.
  49. Ra1den

    Ra1den

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2014
    Posts:
    133
    @Immanuel Scholz That's the reason why I put the "fun" in quotes... fun can mean/be a number of things to a number of people... For example I have fun when I play a horror game! (like seriously i do lol ) the high emotions,tension and the constantly being on the edge, I love it! and i find it enjoyable, Same thing for me when it comes to horror movies but alas i can't say the same thing for everyone right? some people might find sad stories/games enjoyable (and they do or drama movies would have never caught on) some might say exploring a unknown world is fun and the list goes on and on....

    You might see what I'm getting at now, I've slowly moved away from games specifically and started talking about media in general and I'm not disagreeing with you, saying that games should only instill one specific kind of emotion in the audience will only be undermining games as a interactive medium and hinder its potential (which I think is sad as I do believe games can trump music,art and films!)

    So why talk about this "fun"? It's just simply so we can have a focus in this conversation and Yes not all games are about their game mechanics :D
     
  50. RJ-MacReady

    RJ-MacReady

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2013
    Posts:
    1,718
    You could always... and this is just something that just came to me... tell the player that they're a tester? No. Wouldn't work.
     
    Ra1den likes this.