Golf and Games player continuum
by Andy Schatz · 04/16/2006 (7:40 pm) · 5 comments
It occured to me out on the golf course today that most sports fall onto a continuum between A) Strategy B) Precision and C) Effort.
A) Strategy - Making good choices within the game, planning ahead.
B) Precision - Executing as planned upon said strategy
C) Effort - Willpower and physical exertion
Being good at golf requires that the player exist somewhere close to the Strategy/Precision edge of the triangle. In fact, the more effort you put in, generally the less likely you are to do well. Thus, as my game gets worse, I start to try harder, and I get even worse, and I end up crying by the 12th hole.
Cycling or swimming requires that the player be somewhere near the Effort point of the triangle. There is a little strategy, and some precision required, but mostly it's about how capable the body is of putting forth the effort.
Soccer is somewhere in the middle, maybe shading a little more towards precision and effort.
Where does gaming fit on this continuum? Flush against the line between precision and strategy. Interesting that from this perspective, gaming has more in common with golf than it does with soccer, basketball, or cycling. Putting in more effort rarely merits rewards.
Perhaps in comparing gaming to golf on this continuum, it points out that gaming generally exists within the triangle, while golf actually exists outside of the continuum, where effort is actually a negative force on one's ability to play the game.
Does any of this mean anything useful about game design? Anyone care to comment?
A) Strategy - Making good choices within the game, planning ahead.
B) Precision - Executing as planned upon said strategy
C) Effort - Willpower and physical exertion
Being good at golf requires that the player exist somewhere close to the Strategy/Precision edge of the triangle. In fact, the more effort you put in, generally the less likely you are to do well. Thus, as my game gets worse, I start to try harder, and I get even worse, and I end up crying by the 12th hole.
Cycling or swimming requires that the player be somewhere near the Effort point of the triangle. There is a little strategy, and some precision required, but mostly it's about how capable the body is of putting forth the effort.
Soccer is somewhere in the middle, maybe shading a little more towards precision and effort.
Where does gaming fit on this continuum? Flush against the line between precision and strategy. Interesting that from this perspective, gaming has more in common with golf than it does with soccer, basketball, or cycling. Putting in more effort rarely merits rewards.
Perhaps in comparing gaming to golf on this continuum, it points out that gaming generally exists within the triangle, while golf actually exists outside of the continuum, where effort is actually a negative force on one's ability to play the game.
Does any of this mean anything useful about game design? Anyone care to comment?
About the author
#2
WoW, for instance, rewards players with faction reputation for killing the same monsters over and over again. Faction rep gives players access to new gear/patterns/items/etc. This is one case where players are rewarded for straight effort.
04/16/2006 (9:10 pm)
Games don't always limit themselves to just stategy and precision. MMOs have a healthy effort component if you generalize it to mean time-commitment and repetitive actions. RPGs in general usually feature some kind of non-skill, non-strategic gameplay.WoW, for instance, rewards players with faction reputation for killing the same monsters over and over again. Faction rep gives players access to new gear/patterns/items/etc. This is one case where players are rewarded for straight effort.
#3
If you equate "effort" as "physical exertion" then yet. But if you equate effort to imply expenditure of time to gain skill, then some games require huge amounts of effort. In fact, so does golf.
Obviously most games dont require physical exertion, but they do require gathering of skills. The gathering of those skills requires commitment and time.
So I think maybe the terms simply arent a good match with which to evalutate sports vs games.
04/17/2006 (4:59 am)
I think your terms are a bit off Andy.If you equate "effort" as "physical exertion" then yet. But if you equate effort to imply expenditure of time to gain skill, then some games require huge amounts of effort. In fact, so does golf.
Obviously most games dont require physical exertion, but they do require gathering of skills. The gathering of those skills requires commitment and time.
So I think maybe the terms simply arent a good match with which to evalutate sports vs games.
#4
Does this mean anything? Hmm, well its such broad ideas. It may matter in how you design your gameplay from a good game to a great game. These ideas may help determine who your target audience is, or possibly what gameplay elements might be needed.
04/17/2006 (1:46 pm)
Yeah, the effort part is off, as in the case of golf, effort can be the amount of time invested in training/playing to improve skills. Invest more effort in practice and you will begin to start crying by the 18th hole instead. Also, the focus of the effort may help, but it depends on the skill level. If Tiger Woods can re-focus after a few bad holes, is it not possible to come back to win?Does this mean anything? Hmm, well its such broad ideas. It may matter in how you design your gameplay from a good game to a great game. These ideas may help determine who your target audience is, or possibly what gameplay elements might be needed.
#5
04/17/2006 (5:30 pm)
What I was trying to get at here is that the broad generalization of skills required to be good at sports and games DO overlap, and I was trying to understand how one might be able to look at them within a consistent space, so that possibly I could look at how one might be able to push the boundaries of what is fun in games by modeling them after sports. 
Torque 3D Owner Tom Bampton