The difference between games and other entertainment products( such as books, music, movies and plays) is that their consumption is relatively unpredictable. The string of events that occur during gameplay and the outcome of those events are unknown at the time the product is finished. |
Designer |
M D A |
Player |
The MDA framework formalizes the consumption of games by breaking them into their distinct components:
Rules System“ Fun”
… and establishing their design counterparts:
Mechanics
Dynamics
Mechanics describes the particular components of the game, at the level of data representation and algorithms.
Dynamics describes the run-time behavior of the mechanics acting on player inputs and each others’ outputs over time.
Aesthetics describes the desirable emotional responses evoked in the player, when she interacts with the game system.
Fundamental to this framework is the idea that games are more like artifacts than media. By this we mean that the content of a game is its behavior – not the media that streams out of it towards the player.
Thinking about games as designed artifacts helps frame them as systems that build behavior via interaction. It supports clearer design choices and analysis at all levels of study and development.
MDA in Detail
Aesthetics
MDA as Lens
Each component of the MDA framework can be thought of as a“ lens” or a“ view” of the game – separate, but causally linked. [ LeBlanc, 2004b ].
From the designer’ s perspective, the mechanics give rise to dynamic system behavior, which in turn leads to particular aesthetic experiences. From the player’ s perspective, aesthetics set the tone, which is born out in observable dynamics and eventually, operable mechanics.
The designer and player each have a different perspective.
When working with games, it is helpful to consider both the designer and player perspectives. It helps us observe how even small changes in one layer can cascade into others. In addition, thinking about the player encourages experience-driven( as opposed to feature-driven) design.
As such, we begin our investigation with a discussion of Aesthetics, and continue on to Dynamics, finishing with the underlying Mechanics.
Aesthetics
What makes a game“ fun”? How do we know a specific type of fun when we see it? Talking about games and play is hard because the vocabulary we use is relatively limited.
In describing the aesthetics of a game, we want to move away from words like“ fun” and“ gameplay” towards a more directed vocabulary. This includes but is not limited to the taxonomy listed here:
1. Sensation Game as sense-pleasure 2. Fantasy Game as make-believe 3. Narrative
Game as drama 4. Challenge Game as obstacle course
5. Fellowship Game as social framework 6. Discovery Game as uncharted territory 7. Expression Game as self-discovery 8. Submission Game as pastime
For example, consider the games Charades, Quake, The Sims and Final Fantasy. While each are“ fun” in their own right, it is much more informative to consider the aesthetic components that create their respective player experiences:
Charades: Fellowship, Expression, Challenge. Quake: Challenge, Sensation, Competition, Fantasy. The Sims: Discovery, Fantasy, Expression, Narrative.
Final Fantasy: Fantasy, Narrative, Expression, Discovery, Challenge, Submission.
Here we see that each game pursues multiple aesthetic goals, in varying degrees. Charades emphasizes Fellowship over Challenge; Quake provides Challenge as a main element of gameplay. And while there is no Grand Unified Theory of games or formula that details the combination and proportion of elements that will result in“ fun”, this