[AUGUST] A Theory of Fun for Game Design by Raph Koster

[Liz England]

This month's reading is A Theory of Fun for Game Design by Raph Koster.

http://www.theoryoffun.com/

A Theory of Fun for Game Design is not your typical how-to book. It features a novel way of teaching interactive designers how to create and improve their designs to incorporate the highest degree of fun. As the book shows, designing for fun is all about making interactive products like games highly entertaining, engaging, and addictive. The book's unique approach of providing a highly visual storyboard approach combined with a narrative on the art and practice of designing for fun is sure to be a hit with game and interactive designers, At first glance A Theory of Fun for Game Design is a book that will truly inspire and challenge game designers to think in new was; however, its universal message will influence designers from all walks of life. This book captures the real essence of what drives us to seek out products and experiences that are truly fun and entertaining. The author masterfully presents his engaging theory by showing readers how many designs are lacking because they are predictable and not engaging enough. He then explains how great designers use different types of elements in new ways to make designs more fun and compelling. Anyone who is interested in design will enjoy how the book works on two levels--as a quick inspiration guide to game design, or as an informative discussion that details the insightful thinking from a great mind in the game industry.

[Excerpt from Amazon's book listing]

I recommend the newest edition - the 10th anniversary one - if you are picking up a new copy. I've already read this but look forward to reading it again since I've seen a lot of parallels between the content of this book and other ones we've read for the book club.

Happy reading and hope everyone's enjoying their summer!

[Raphael Gaschignard]

Does this book have a lot of drawings or is it basically text? Trying to figure out whether to get the kindle version or the paperback

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Game Design Book Club" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to game-design-book-club+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to game-design-book-club@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/game-design-book-club/b8a7c753-2af7-451e-8d05-e2765742fad4%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Dog Eighty]

In the print copy, every page on the left is in text, every page on the right is a cartoon. You can read through the entire thing in a couple of hours. If you're pressed for time, you can just read the cartoons and get the general idea in a few minutes.

To post to this group, send email to game-desig...@googlegroups.com.

[Liz England]

Ditto.

It would probably read fine on kindle, but the paperback reads really nicely so I'd recommend that.

[Nick Burnham]

Just finished reading this for the first time, and it was fantastic. Really helped me put my own thoughts about games into words and made succinct arguments against a lot of myths surrounding game design and games culture. My library only had the first edition, so I'm interested to see what Koster's added since 2005.

[simoens]

I read this book a couple of months ago and I remember not being all to impressed with it. 

It was a fun read for sure and the use of cartoons made the book very unique and well worth a look. 

I guess I was left hungry for the 'theory' of fun though. The book rather felt like a philosophy of fun.

I'll try to read it again before the end of august. 

It might be the case that the book just didn't answer the questions I suspected it would at the time and if so that will have tainted my experience.

Op vrijdag 5 augustus 2016 18:46:05 UTC+2 schreef Liz England:

[Dog Eighty]

Keep in mind the historical context. Back in 2004, most game designers had never even heard of Csikszentmihalyi or Flow or any of it, so even though ToF was more or less a retelling of a psychology book from 1990, it was novel and mind-blowing to game designers at the time.

These days, flow theory is taught in most Game Design 101 classes and we're all much more familiar with the concept, so if you've encountered it in other contexts then ToF won't seem all that shocking.

I do still like the format of "page of text / cartoon" though. More books should do that.

- Ian

[John Lethbridge]

So, I finished the book up last week but haven't had a chance to post by thoughts yet.

For me, this was a tough read. Not that the vocabulary was difficult, nor the subject matter, but rather that I'm a game developer in 2016, long after the book was originally published and much of it's core lessons have become rote in the industry. As a result the book had a dated feel that I couldn't shake off while reading. Another issue I had were the cartoons. I understand they were all done by Raph, by hand, and on a tight deadline, but for me they only detracted from the points being made. I would have much preferred they not exist as I felt they only padded out the book.

So what were my issues? Well, some of the statements around the lessons were very black & white. Stating that no system should be in the game that doesn't reinforce the core theme/ethos of the game. The thing that you are teaching the player. I don't necessarily believe that's correct. I feel that games that have superfluous systems that don't necessarily reinforce the core lesson are interesting in their own right and those systems can provide a much needed break. They give the player something fresh and new. Now that should always be done with care so as not to detract from the core of the game, but my point remains.

Also the point on Emergent Behaviour, while possibly rooted in it's own time, is inherently wrong. Emergent behaviour generating loopholes to your systems is a symptom of a bigger issue with the systems are play. Players will almost always be playing emergently unless the game is very heavily on rails. That's just what happens when you give different people the controller - they use what they're given to create new strategies. Those strategies are emergent.

I also think mentioning emergent behaviour as it pertains to AI would have been worthwhile as that's a very interesting course of thought as well.

Asserting that in the section on the Mastery Problem that players are failing to exercise their brains properly is simply wrong-headed. If a player prefers a game that requires no skill (which frankly is impossible as simply engaging with a game requires skill on some level,  however low that may be) then we should be looking at what it is about that game the player likes. Perhaps that person is averse to challenges in games for a particular reason - whether through prior experience or simply preference. I think some thinking has been done here already in the time since the book came out however as there has been an increase in "no skill"/low-skill games in part manifesting in the much maligned 'walking simulators'. Many of these are very interesting games that have a very low barrier of entry. Their popularity, even if it turns out to be vanishingly brief, says something that we should be paying attention to - not discarding out of hand as players being wrong on some level.

So that's the bad. What about the good?

Well there were a few points that spoke to me. 

Noise - Noise being a pattern that the player doesn't recognise was an interesting revelation. It's not an approach I'd considered on a conscious level before and something I've actively starting thinking about in my designs.

Learning - That the joy of learning is in the doing, and once done it cannot be done again. Another good point and something that the recent discussion around No Man's Sky also brought to my mind. I like this point rather a lot.

Story vs Game - Specifically when players skip one in favour of the other. Another interesting point that is echo'd in the increasingly common ability to set a game's difficulty to 'narrative' to allow players who want to enjoy the story primarily, to do so.

Really, for me personally, this book didn't 'pick up' until about Chapter 7. Before that was a lot of ground work and commentary on various background topics that I'm not sure were warranted for the points to come later in the book, but I do see the value for some designers in those things.

Overall I'd say the last half of the book was the best for me. Raph has worked on some of my favourite games and it's interesting to see his take on various design subjects. I just think that this book was a little too dated to be of real value for me.