I’m sure most of us are aware that a lot of the mechanics of incremental games rely on things like skinner boxes to make us want to keep playing by just promising us future positive moments, rather than just giving us positive moments.
Where do you think the line is, between genuine fun vs just being manipulated into wanting to keep playing? Or is there no difference?
Additionally, awareness of video game addiction is pretty important within the genre. The community has a lot of young people who could be harmed if playing games long enough into the night as to disrupt their sleep cycle, for example. To that end I’ve been considering adding a notice to my future games when the game has been actively played a lot, that mentions video games addiction along with some resources to help. When do you think it’d make sense to display this? I was thinking about showing it if the player has been active within the game during 6 of the last 8 hours.
I think it’s interesting that within the community, games kinda get treated as if the more abstract they are, the more “pure” they are, like a game is less incremental if it puts effort into anything apart from the gameplay itself. Narrative, graphics, and sound design are almost treated as negatives.
I was going to lead into saying that the “pure” games are probably more likely to fall into manipulation rather than genuine fun, but as I was writing it I thought about how loot boxes, which are obviously manipulative, use flashy effects to make them feel more rewarding. So I don’t think it’s the presence of those things that makes a game more genuine fun either. Honestly I just have a hard time finding where the line is, beyond “I know it when I see it”.