What game elements make for addicting gameplay?

Because of their immediate and effective reinforcement schedules, games elements like slot machines have would top my list.

 

ok, what exactly is your problem?

 

Ummm...I've no "problem". This is the forum for open discussion, correct?

Under the link for this forum is the text:

"General discussion and cool ideas"

 

I think this is exactly why match-3 games have dominated the casual space for years.

It's also why careful consideration needs to be made to visual and sound effects. You want feedback to be "juicy".

 

I would look into game theory and the related behavioral psychology stuff. Sounds like what you are after.

 

Sure, that's helpful but the reason I posted was to prompt a discussion of what people feel are game elements that leave users wanting more.

What about you CharlesHinshaw, how might you make a game more "sticky"?

 

Wire it directly to the mesolimbic pathway and allow mouse clicks to directly release dopamine? Seriously, my personal belief is that it revolves around reward systems and designing out obstacles to rewards for players.

 

1. Make sure the basic concept can be understood in a few minutes of play time and that those few minutes catch their attention.
2. Make it easy to learn the basics even for non gamers
3. Make it hard to master. Especially make sure that there is a learning curve. Player need to be challenged and see progress in the game and on themself or they will get bored / frustrated very fast.

I don't think there is a specific element that makes it a good game or a bad game. Its the way you use the element in your game, especially how you use the combination of different elements and how well the work together.

Puzzle Quest is a very good example for that I think. It uses puzzle bad adds elements hardly ever used before in a puzzle game with its RPG part and how it uses known working mechanisms of match 3 and special attacks known from Puyo Puyo for over a decade now.

 

Some other elements also seem to include customization. This seems to let the player invest more emotion into the game by letting the player identify with the game.

Yes, these all are excellent points.

Note to self, do not piss CharlesHinshaw off. Seriously.

 

Carnage and chaos. Flash as much stuff on screen as you possibly can, and have people and animals making as much noise as possible, but have it all be tied to how well the player is doing. At my place, if you can inspire us to play by giving us that kind of reward, you may have a winner.

As far as slot machines go, Vegas is very much about this exact thing. Keep it fast, keep them in a tizzy. Except, in that case, you get rewarded with all that sensory overload even if you don't win, in an effort to get the next wave of cash out of you. However, there is a moral in that, I think. Playing should be its own reward, but playing well should take it to another level.

 

everyones different but what i like to see is as follows

1: to hold the user slick graphics a must2:tight animation
3: scene set with a cool but brief FMV sequence
4: original styalised charectors
5riginal story concept
6:user friendly interface and in game tutorial on how to control charectors
7:in adventire games puzzles that are relevant to overall story line
8:suspension of disbelief

Best game off all time
sonys
1:Ico (not played it strongly advice you to do so how a game should be made(playstation 2)
2:Little big adventure 1 and 2
3: Flashback

 

I wonder why people still play Tetris, no rewards, no story, ... :O)

Tetris Tip of the day, NES Emulator plus the officially never released Atari version. The story behind this is also quite interesting, video games history.

 

I never played a Little Big Adventure, but those other two are quite good. I think they both could stand to have a lot less combat, but otherwise, phenomenal in all ways for the times of their releases.

 

If you're going for addictive gameplay, multiplayer can be huge, or some other means of producing 'non-consumable' content.

An example - a scripted chase sequence where you're outrunning a monster in a jeep (like a theme park ride) could be really awesome the first time, but predictable and stale afterwards. The amount of time, planning, and money that goes into such sequences such as those in Call of Duty 4 is immense, and the player pretty much only gets that thrill once. The ratio of development time to player payoff is very lopsided.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, let's say you have a multiplayer shooter, like call of duty's multiplayer mode. The game is in constant flux, because you never know where your opponents will be, or how good of a shot they are because they're all human controlled. Furthermore, the developer chose to add a leveling up system akin to an MMO, where continuous play accrues persistent rewards over time like new guns and abilities, making a very addictive experience.

This is a common equation in most FPS's - the majority of the development time is spent on the offline campaign/story mode, but players ultimately end up more addicted to the unpredictability of multiplayer. It doesn't have to be competitive multiplayer though, co-op can transform even a mostly linear game into a more interesting and varied experience.

I'd say real-time physics, interesting AI and reactive environments can also provide gameplay that appears different each time through the same place.

 

variable interval reinforcement

http://sharpgeek.com/2006/09/variable-interval-reinforcement.html