2 ms·

I disagree with the implicit belief that every game should be fun. There are other metrics to judge games by. Though it might be needed in this particular game,

I disagree with the implicit belief that every game should be fun. There are other metrics to judge games by. Though it might be needed in this particular game, it's not true of all games as a whole, nor of every mechanic in games. The Beginner's Guide did not need fun to keep me, at least, engaged. Dwarf Fortress's fun must be made almost entirely by the player. Boring or downright hostile mechanics - such as long travel times in X3, or the long slog of rebuilding an army after a disastrous war in Mount and Blade, or permadeath in Darkest Dungeon and roguelikes - are not fun, yet I contend that without them the rest of the game would feel boring, even weightless. The unfun parts don't just "pad out" the game, they give meaning to the player's decisions and make choices matter.

ItsMonkk 4y ago
I accept this criticism. I misspoke slightly when I said fun. Entertaining is closer. A game should know what it wants to invoke in the player, and the entire game should be built around that. In a game like Paper's Please, your moment to moment gameplay might not be fun, but the tedium is deliberate and a part of the experience. Cutting down trees for a half an hour straight so that you can later be creative and decorate your house, much less so.
- _manifold 4y ago
  I think that the term "fun" is pretty narrow and ultimately a poor descriptor of what makes a game interesting to play. It seems like a lot of discussions on the subject tend toward this realization. "Engaging" or "compelling" I think are potentially better words but both sound pretty sterile and corporate to me.
  - jmiskovic 4y ago
    To me "compelling" hits the mark. It carries meaning that you are engaging with the game, sometimes against your better judgement. Most of gaming industry is perfecting the art of compelling players to spend time and money on their products. There are game studios though that give more of an honest vibe: Thatgamecompany, Media Molecule, Introversion Software, Mossmouth, Sokpop... It is still impossible to draw a line where the game starts to exploit the psyche addiction mechanisms.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

ItsMonkk 4y ago

I accept this criticism. I misspoke slightly when I said fun. Entertaining is closer. A game should know what it wants to invoke in the player, and the entire game should be built around that. In a game like Paper's Please, your moment to moment gameplay might not be fun, but the tedium is deliberate and a part of the experience. Cutting down trees for a half an hour straight so that you can later be creative and decorate your house, much less so.

_manifold 4y ago
I think that the term "fun" is pretty narrow and ultimately a poor descriptor of what makes a game interesting to play. It seems like a lot of discussions on the subject tend toward this realization. "Engaging" or "compelling" I think are potentially better words but both sound pretty sterile and corporate to me.
- jmiskovic 4y ago
  To me "compelling" hits the mark. It carries meaning that you are engaging with the game, sometimes against your better judgement. Most of gaming industry is perfecting the art of compelling players to spend time and money on their products. There are game studios though that give more of an honest vibe: Thatgamecompany, Media Molecule, Introversion Software, Mossmouth, Sokpop... It is still impossible to draw a line where the game starts to exploit the psyche addiction mechanisms.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]