What Games Are

Mechanics Are Bigger Than Games

When we talk about "mechanics", as we often do when talking about games, we often do so at cross purposes. I rarely use the term as a result, preferring something more specific like action or rule, but the fact its that most people don't. At best they often say "action mechanic" or "rule mechanic", and at worst they confuse mechanics with dynamics.

C'est la vie.

One of the useful things I find when thinking of mechanics in small, exacting terms is considering its application beyond games. This question came up on Twitter the other day when Jurie Horneman offhandedly asked whether interactive fiction has mechanics. To which I answer yes.

In game design terms, an action is the application of verbs intended to cause one or more unscripted state changes in the game, like moving an avatar or placing a word. I see no reason why the same can't be said of posting a tweet, or making a choice in an adventure. The other two kinds of verb usage are the same. A nudge, where the player uses verbs to cause a scripted state change, is like flipping the page in Flipboard. A query, where the player uses verbs to find more information about something without causing a state change, is the same as a right click.

Limiting ourselves to only thinking of mechanics in terms of "game" may be a misstep. Often the most delightful actions, nudges and queries are to be found outside of games (Flipboard again) but may have equally fun uses inside them. Why worry about whether they are game mechanics? Worry instead about whether they are worth doing.

Podcast: Are Games Made of Games

As an experiment, I've created an audio podcast of yesterday's post on recursion and chaos theory. Let me know what you think.

 

Are Games Made of Games?

You can also grab the MP3 from here:

Link

 

Are Games Made of Games?

Games usually consist of interconnected and repeating patterns of play which group together to form larger movements. Some designers take this idea further by saying that smaller and larger patterns have much the same shape. So a loop generated from a single action such as hitting an opponent and a movement of play (such as killing a boss) are basically the same thing. One is just a larger version of the other. 

So, they say, games are made of games. Are they?

(Click here for the podcast of this post)

The Narrative vs Mechanics Circus

Last month I contracted what seemed to be a simple cold which progressed into a bronchial infection combined with asthma that knocked me out for three weeks.

It was really bad timing because around the same time, Raph Koster posted a blog bombshell when he said ‘Narrative is not a game mechanic’. A fair few commenters arose in support or ire. Posts flew about whether the meaning of narrative was too broad or limited, whether this was really about a limited formal view of games versus their possibilities, and so on. Exciting stuff, but I couldn’t really get into it.

I’m still recovering, but being ill has given me the chance to reflect and remember that there’s a reason that I don’t normally use the phrase ‘mechanics’. There's also a reason why I tend to dismiss broad narrativism. It’s because both of them are part of a pretend debate over correctness, and each – in their own way – is just circular flame-bait, an ever-burning meme that goes nowhere.

Game Dynamics vs Game Mechanics

Nobody's ever really agreed on what a game mechanic is.

If you zip around the web looking for an agreed definition, you'll come across a variety from the physical what-you-do actions that players take, to the loop of action and reaction and rules, to (in some cases) an attempt to express the more ephemeral sense of experience that a game can evoke.

The reason for this confusion is that the term game mechanic is lifted from the world of board games and tabletop role playing games, where it means moves and dice rolls.

Video games are very different from trad (or analog if you prefer) games in two important respects: Firstly, real time is a factor in the vast majority of them. Secondly, economy of information is a major factor because of the restrictive nature of the screen environment.

The upshot is that, like sports, video games are dynamic rather than mechanic driven. The rules are implicit and simple rather than explicit and complex. It makes sense to describe and think of them in loops and dynamics with predictable and outlier effects than action-and-rule mechanics, because much of the fun of them comes from the slightly chaotic, player-discovered patterns of play rather than formal strategy.

Rocket jumps, for example, are an effect of a dynamic environment, not any one deliberately designed mechanism. Any description of game design needs to be able to capture that chaos, don't you think?