-
So in the 1970s, there was this experiment
where a bunch of kids were told to
-
draw some pictures.
-
But before that, the children were split into
groups.
-
One group was told that that they would receive
a reward at the end, while the second group
-
had no reward.
-
After the drawings were finished, the researchers
continued to watch the kids in their classroom
-
for a couple weeks - and the results were
pretty interesting.
-
And not just "the unanticipated arrival of
a goat in the classroom".
-
*Goat bleat*
-
But I'll come back to that - because I should
explain what this has got to do with game design.
-
Often in design, we want to motivate players.
-
Perhaps motivate them to learn a new mechanic,
or encourage them to use a specific feature,
-
or just get them to play the game for longer.
-
And a popular solution for this is the goal…
and reward.
-
Do this, get that.
-
Like, quests that lead to experience points.
-
Challenges that unlock cosmetics.
-
And those cheeky Xbox achievements which are
both a goal and a reward in one tidy package.
-
But I'm here to tell you that goals and rewards
don't always work how you want them to.
-
And, in fact, in this video I'm going to explain
how they can even have the complete, opposite effect…
-
When Klei was making the initial prototype
for its sandbox survival game Don't Starve,
-
they quickly realised that testers had no
idea how to play the game - and they instantly
-
became stuck.
-
So the testers were given a few hints - and
once they got over the hump, they were able
-
to experiment, explore, and started to have
a lot of fun.
-
In response, Klei decided to create a series
of small, tutorial-like quests to help players
-
get started.
-
Survive this many nights.
-
Find this many items.
-
That sort of thing.
-
And it worked!
-
But only so much as players learned how to
play the game.
-
Because beyond that, the quests were a complete
and utter disaster.
-
Klei discovered that players focused exclusively
on those quests, and thought of everything
-
else as a noisy distraction.
-
They optimised their play in really boring
ways in order to finish the quest at hand.
-
They avoided doing anything risky, because
it meant they might fail.
-
And then they became completely demotivated
the second the quests ran out.
-
Klei says "In structuring the game as a series
of explicit tasks to be completed, we taught
-
the player to depend upon those tasks to create
meaning in the game".
-
In the end, Klei solved its onboarding problem
by tweaking the UI to give players subtle
-
hints about how to get started - such as highlighting
the most important items you can craft.
-
But the quests were left on the cutting room
floor - leaving players to learn for themselves.
-
Because if a game is about experimentation,
exploration, or player-guided discovery - explicit
-
goals can limit a player's creativity and
imagination.
-
Even after the goals run out.
-
This is exactly what drove the development
of the cosmic archeology game Outer Wilds.
-
The developers deliberately avoided giving
players explicit goals about where to go,
-
or even what you're trying to achieve - so
that players are driven to explore this miniature
-
solar system through a sense of curiosity
alone.
-
Okay, here's another story.
-
Zach Barth makes problem-solving puzzle games
about designing your own automated machines,
-
like Exapunks and Shenzen I/O.
-
In these games, you can make the machines
however you like - if it works, it works.
-
But it's actually really fun to go back in,
and see if you can refine your creation to
-
make it, say, smaller or faster.
-
So in Zach's first two commercial games, Spacechem
and Infinifactory, he added a few Steam achievements
-
that encourage this sort of optimisation - like
the Spacechem achievement "Beat the assignment
-
"No Thanks Necessary" in under 2200 cycles."
-
But, in all the games released after that
- those achievements are completely gone.
-
What's up with that?
-
ZACH: "We wanted to add achievements because
that was back when achievements were cool.
-
That was back before I thought achievements
were awful."
-
ZACH: "The thing i don't like about them is
that the game already has a reward system.
-
We have something that's far more meaningful
and far less arbitrary than a random threshold."
-
What Zach's talking about is a bounty of metrics
that you can use to gauge how well you've done.
-
There's your own personal score.
-
There's leaderboards that compare you to your
Steam friends.
-
And there are these brilliant histograms that
show you how your solution stacks up in comparison
-
to every other player.
-
All of these - the strive to beat your personal
best, or the drive to do better than other
-
players - are extremely strong motivators
to do better.
-
As Zach says: "a goal that you set yourself
is way more powerful than a goal someone else
-
sets for you".
-
So if a game is about improving yourself,
a personal or social goal can be a stronger
-
motivator than a set threshold.
-
My final story comes from the adorable track-laying
puzzle game Mini Metro.
-
The game's developers wanted to focus on personal
growth and high scores.
-
And so - according to UI designer Jamie Churchman
- the team specifically tried to avoid these
-
goal and reward meta structures as they can
become a "means to an end".
-
For example, the game does have unlockable
cities - which is just to limit player choice
-
at the beginning of the game.
-
But Jamie acknowledges that some people will
play each city until the threshold, unlock
-
the next one, and when they've unlocked all
the cities they feel like they've finished
-
the game and can stop playing.
-
We should remember that goals are a checklist
that can be completed.
-
And like with Don't Starve, some players will
exclusively rely on the game to give them
-
purpose and direction.
-
But measurements of your skill - such as leaderboards
and scoring systems, have no finish: you can
-
continue to improve on your personal best
forever - which partly explains why we can
-
still play Tetris after three decades.
-
To truly understand what's happening here,
we need to take a quick detour into the world
-
of behavioural psychology.
-
When thinking about motivation, one of the
most popular models is the idea of extrinsic
-
and intrinsic motivation.
-
To make it simple, extrinsic motivation is
when we are doing a task for reasons beyond
-
the task itself - usually in order to receive
a reward.
-
Or, as that's better known: a job.
-
On the other hand, intrinsic motivation is
when we do a task for its own sake, simply
-
because we find it enjoyable or meaningful.
-
Or, as that's better known: a hobby.
-
Intrinsic motivation is shown to be far stronger
- and it lasts longer too.
-
People can enjoy a hobby for a lifetime.
-
Extrinsic motivation will only last as long
as the rewards are there.
-
Just see if someone will still work in your
factory after you stop paying them.
-
And this bring us back to that classroom from
earlier.
-
Okay, so the point of the study was that the
kids had already shown interest in drawing
-
before the study began.
-
They were intrinsically motivated.
-
Then, they were asked to make a picture - and,
like I said, one group was promised a reward,
-
and the second group wasn't.
-
Afterwards, the researchers continued to watch
the kids in their classroom for a couple weeks
-
and found that the children who received a
reward for their drawing?
-
Well, they showed much less interest in drawing
afterwards.
-
And their pictures were of a lower quality
too.
-
Which is - wow, way to burn a bunch of kids,
science.
-
This is called the overjustification effect.
-
And there's a huge body of evidence that says
when extrinsic motivation is attached to a
-
task that we already find intrinsically motivating,
we suddenly become way less interested in
-
the task.
-
And other studies show rewards also make people
less creative, worse at problem solving, more
-
prone to cheating, and may lose motivation
entirely once the rewards stop - even though
-
previously they were happy to do it for its
own sake!
-
Whoops!
-
And I think we can apply this idea to game
design.
-
Because there are certainly games that lean
more towards intrinsic motivation.
-
Like games that focus on exploration, creativity,
expression, and growth.
-
There are games where you set your own goals
and expect no rewards in return.
-
And so when more extrinsically motivating
systems - like explicit goals, progression
-
meters, and achievements - are added to these
games, our motivation can take a hit.
-
We become blinkered to creative solutions.
-
We're less motivated to improve ourselves.
-
We put an arbitrary threshold on how much
we attain.
-
And developers now need to create a constant
drip feed of new goals and rewards, or risk
-
losing us entirely.
-
Of course, that's not to say that developers
should never add goals and rewards to these
-
more intrinsically motivating games.
-
Because, I think it's clear that some people
just aren't very good or interested in motivating
-
themselves.
-
For every Minecraft super fan who generates
their own fun, there's someone else who is
-
simply lost and without direction.
-
It reminds me of my all-time favourite Steam
forum post.
-
In a thread about the open-ended whodunnit
Her Story, one user said "It's up to you to
-
decide when you are satisfied with the information
you have found".
-
To which the thread's author replied, "how
do I decide when I am satisfied?".
-
That post keeps me up at night.
-
Anyway - the nice thing about goals and rewards
is that they can provide structure and progression
-
to play.
-
So they can still be used, they just have
to be applied carefully.
-
For example, with goals - it's better to use
large, overarching goals that players can
-
complete however they want, rather than restrictive
step-by-step instructions.
-
You can focus on comparative metrics, like
leaderboards, histograms, and personal bests,
-
rather than absolute thresholds.
-
Make goals optional, like Hitman's challenges,
or hidden, like Outer Wilds' achievements.
-
And in terms of rewards - well, actually there
is one type of reward that has been shown
-
to not trigger the overjustification effect.
-
Because, in that study with the children - there
was actually a third group: children that
-
were simply told to go off and draw - but
then were given a reward at the end, as a surprise.
-
In the following weeks, these children spent
the largest amount of time drawing… of all
-
- if only by a small margin beyond the kids
without rewards.
-
This, and plenty of other studies, show that
rewards can have a motivational effect in
-
intrinsic situations - provided that they're
unexpected, reasonably low value, and feel
-
tied to the actual performance of the action.
-
An example of this in games might be Overwatch's
Play of the Game, which is a short highlight
-
reel showcasing the best moment in the match.
-
It doesn't really do anything, but it's a
huge boost to the ego of the player who gets
-
the starring role.
-
And this is all over Nintendo's latest blockbusters.
-
In Odyssey, there's nothing telling you to
clamber up here with Mario's advanced move-set:
-
but here's a cheeky cache of coins as a pat
on the back.
-
And in Breath of the Wild, every suspicious
nook could be a reward, like a Korok seed.
-
As Nintendo's Bill Trinen says: "When they
create their games, [Nintendo's designers]
-
don't tell you how to play their game in order
to achieve some kind of mythical reward.
-
There are things you can do in the game that
will result in some sort of reward or unexpected
-
surprise.
-
In my mind, that really encourages the sense
of exploration rather than the sense of 'If
-
I do that, I'm going to get some sort of artificial
point or score'."
-
Hey, thanks for watching!
-
Just wanted to let you know that GMTK videos
will now be ad free - so a big thanks to all
-
of my Patrons for supporting this work and
making these videos possible.
-
You are amazing.