Predictable Winner - Revision history

Staffan Björk at 13:06, 6 September 2016

2016-09-06T13:06:05Z

Staffan Björk at 08:51, 4 September 2016

2016-09-04T08:51:58Z

Staffan Björk at 08:48, 3 September 2016

2016-09-03T08:48:24Z

Staffan Björk at 13:42, 26 July 2016

2016-07-26T13:42:10Z

Staffan Björk at 08:31, 24 November 2015

2015-11-24T08:31:14Z

Staffan Björk at 14:18, 27 July 2015

2015-07-27T14:18:34Z

Staffan Björk at 19:49, 25 January 2015

2015-01-25T19:49:39Z

Staffan Björk at 11:07, 22 January 2015

2015-01-22T11:07:03Z

Staffan Björk at 21:10, 18 January 2015

2015-01-18T21:10:27Z

Staffan Björk: /* Using the pattern */

2015-01-17T10:01:02Z

‎Using the pattern

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 == Using the pattern ==
-The concept of a [[Predictable Winner]] requires several competing players, which is to say that the pattern requires [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Competitions]] or [[Conflicts]], and can be seen as modulating these. The presence of [[Scores]] are likely to make people start looking for [[Predictable Winner|Predictable Winners]], since the [[Scores]] provide a (potentially misleading) overview of the players' relative positions. That said, games are rarely designed to have a [[Predictable Winner]] but it may occur because of [[Predictable Consequences]], that some players can have [[Gameplay Mastery]] while other do not, or through the possibility of [[Kingmaker|Kingmakers]]. For this reason, design choices regarding [[Predictable Winner]] usually concerns avoiding it or handling it when it occurs.
+The concept of a [[Predictable Winner]] requires several competing players, which is to say that the pattern requires [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Competitions]] or [[Conflicts]], and can be seen as modulating these. The presence of [[Scores]] are likely to make people start looking for [[Predictable Winner|Predictable Winners]], since the [[Scores]] provide a (potentially misleading) overview of the players' relative positions. That said, games are rarely designed to have a [[Predictable Winner]] but it may occur because of [[Predictable Consequences]], that individual players can take continuous advantage of [[Positive Feedback Loops]], that some players can have [[Gameplay Mastery]] while other do not, or through the possibility of [[Kingmaker|Kingmakers]]. For this reason, design choices regarding [[Predictable Winner]] usually concerns avoiding it or handling it when it occurs.
 Introducing an [[Uncertainty of Outcome]] is the main way of working against games having a [[Predictable Winner]]. A way of achieving this through making players' goals uncertain is to use [[Secret Goals]] or [[Secret Scoring Mechanisms]]. The two main patterns that cause uncertainty in relation to winning against others are [[Performance Uncertainty]] and [[Player Unpredictability]].
@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 === Can Be Instantiated By ===
 [[Gameplay Mastery]],
 [[Predictable Consequences]],
 [[Kingmaker]],

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 Introducing an [[Uncertainty of Outcome]] is the main way of working against games having a [[Predictable Winner]]. A way of achieving this through making players' goals uncertain is to use [[Secret Goals]] or [[Secret Scoring Mechanisms]]. The two main patterns that cause uncertainty in relation to winning against others are [[Performance Uncertainty]] and [[Player Unpredictability]].
-[[Balancing Effects]] can directly affect the actual chance that a game state will occur in which a winner is given, while [[Imperfect Information]] can be used to make it more difficult to judge to relative positions of players if the information is directly related to the winning conditions. [[Exaggerated Perception of Influence]] can do the same by giving misinformation regarding players' actual chances of succeeding with goals and actions in the game. [[Randomness]] can achieve both, but players with knowledge about statistics may be able to use this to be able to make reliable predictions anyway if enough random events are involved in the gameplay. When it is not also predictable whom will receive [[Rewards]] and these [[Rewards]] affect the winning condition, the use of [[Increasing Rewards]] can make winners less predictable.
+[[Balancing Effects]] and [[Negative Feedback Loops]] can directly affect the actual chance that a game state will occur in which a winner is given, while [[Imperfect Information]] can be used to make it more difficult to judge to relative positions of players if the information is directly related to the winning conditions. [[Exaggerated Perception of Influence]] can do the same by giving misinformation regarding players' actual chances of succeeding with goals and actions in the game. [[Randomness]] can achieve both, but players with knowledge about statistics may be able to use this to be able to make reliable predictions anyway if enough random events are involved in the gameplay. When it is not also predictable whom will receive [[Rewards]] and these [[Rewards]] affect the winning condition, the use of [[Increasing Rewards]] can make winners less predictable.
 Situations where players see a [[Predictable Winner]] can be handled in different ways. [[Drop-In/Drop-Out]] gameplay can allow losing players to avoid having to continue while still providing gameplay for those believed to win and those not convinced of the inevitability of the outcome, while [[Possibility of Graceful Surrender]] can let players end prematurely either gameplay or specific gameplay parts without disrupting other players gameplay catastrophically.
@@ Line 66: / Line 66: @@
 [[Imperfect Information]],
 [[Increasing Rewards]],
 [[Performance Uncertainty]],
 [[Player Unpredictability]],

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 == Using the pattern ==
-The concept of a [[Predictable Winner]] requires several competing players, which is to say that the pattern requires [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Competitions]] or [[Conflicts]], and can be seen as modulating these. The presence of [[Scores]] are likely to make people start looking for [[Predictable Winners]], since the [[Scores]] provide a (potentially misleading) overview of the players' relative positions. That said, games are rarely designed to have a [[Predictable Winner]] but it may occur because of [[Predictable Consequences]], that some players can have [[Gameplay Mastery]] while other do not, or through the possibility of [[Kingmaker|Kingmakers]]. For this reason, design choices regarding [[Predictable Winner]] usually concerns avoiding it or handling it when it occurs.
+The concept of a [[Predictable Winner]] requires several competing players, which is to say that the pattern requires [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Competitions]] or [[Conflicts]], and can be seen as modulating these. The presence of [[Scores]] are likely to make people start looking for [[Predictable Winner|Predictable Winners]], since the [[Scores]] provide a (potentially misleading) overview of the players' relative positions. That said, games are rarely designed to have a [[Predictable Winner]] but it may occur because of [[Predictable Consequences]], that some players can have [[Gameplay Mastery]] while other do not, or through the possibility of [[Kingmaker|Kingmakers]]. For this reason, design choices regarding [[Predictable Winner]] usually concerns avoiding it or handling it when it occurs.
 Introducing an [[Uncertainty of Outcome]] is the main way of working against games having a [[Predictable Winner]]. A way of achieving this through making players' goals uncertain is to use [[Secret Goals]] or [[Secret Scoring Mechanisms]]. The two main patterns that cause uncertainty in relation to winning against others are [[Performance Uncertainty]] and [[Player Unpredictability]].

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 There are several patterns that make the presence of a [[Predictable Winner]] less likely due to being incompatible with them. These include [[Exaggerated Perception of Influence]], [[Imperfect Information]], [[Increasing Rewards]], and [[Randomness]], which were mentioned above since they can be put into designs to avoid [[Predictable Winner]]. [[Tension]] is another pattern difficult to combine with [[Predictable Winner]] (although conceivably there can be [[Tension]] regarding who will be second in a game, etc.) but the addition of [[Tension]] to a game does not have any typically causality towards making [[Predictable Winner]] less likely to emerge. The reserve is however true, the presence of [[Predictable Winner]] is likely to remove any [[Tension]] that exists regarding the winning position.
-[[Predictable Winner]] make the use of [[Winner determined after Gameplay Ends]] impossible and can make an [[Endgame]] uninteresting. In contrast, [[Predictable Winner]] and [[Unwinnable Games]] are incompatible in the typical case when the both patterns refer to the same concept of winning. This may not necessarily be the case, players can compete against each other in [[Unwinnable Games]] such as [[Tetris]] or [[:Category:Pinball Games|Pinball Games]] to see to gets the highest score.
+[[Predictable Winner]] make the use of [[Winner determined after Gameplay Ends]] impossible and can make an [[Endgame]] uninteresting. In contrast, [[Predictable Winner]] and [[Unwinnable Games]] are incompatible in the typical case when the both patterns refer to the same concept of winning. This may not necessarily be the case, players can compete against each other in [[Unwinnable Games]] such as [[Tetris]] or [[:Category:Pinball Games|Pinball Games]] to see to gets the highest score. Truly [[Predictable Winner]] situations gives all other players [[Unwinnable Game States]].
 == Relations ==
@@ Line 39: / Line 39: @@
 [[Kingmaker]],
 [[Speedending]],
-[[Surrendering]]
+[[Surrendering]],
 === Can Modulate ===

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 == Consequences ==
-As stated above, players are likely to adopt [[Beat the Leader]] tactics if at all possible when [[Predictable Winner]] situations occurs. Less likely but potentially more problematic is that players in positions they consider hopeless turn to [[Kingmaker]] solutions or [[Surrendering]] without a [[Possibility of Graceful Surrender]]. The [[Predictable Winner]] will himself or herself instead try to engage in [[Speedending]] if possible.
+As stated above, players are likely to adopt [[Beat the Leader]] tactics if at all possible when [[Predictable Winner]] situations occurs. Less likely but potentially more problematic is that players in positions they consider hopeless turn to [[Kingmaker]] solutions or [[Surrendering]] without a [[Possibility of Graceful Surrender]]. Both these reactions can be seen as ways of dealing with that one cannot feel a [[Value of Effort]] regarding the gameplay. The [[Predictable Winner]] will himself or herself instead try to engage in [[Speedending]] if possible.
 There are several patterns that make the presence of a [[Predictable Winner]] less likely due to being incompatible with them. These include [[Exaggerated Perception of Influence]], [[Imperfect Information]], [[Increasing Rewards]], and [[Randomness]], which were mentioned above since they can be put into designs to avoid [[Predictable Winner]]. [[Tension]] is another pattern difficult to combine with [[Predictable Winner]] (although conceivably there can be [[Tension]] regarding who will be second in a game, etc.) but the addition of [[Tension]] to a game does not have any typically causality towards making [[Predictable Winner]] less likely to emerge. The reserve is however true, the presence of [[Predictable Winner]] is likely to remove any [[Tension]] that exists regarding the winning position.
@@ Line 73: / Line 73: @@
 [[Uncertainty of Outcome]],
 [[Unwinnable Games]],
 [[Winner determined after Gameplay Ends]]

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 The concept of a [[Predictable Winner]] requires several competing players, which is to say that the pattern requires [[Multiplayer Games]] with [[Competitions]] or [[Conflicts]], and can be seen as modulating these. That said, games are rarely designed to have a [[Predictable Winner]] but it may occur because of [[Predictable Consequences]], that some players can have [[Gameplay Mastery]] while other do not, or through the possibility of [[Kingmaker|Kingmakers]]. For this reason, design choices regarding [[Predictable Winner]] usually concerns avoiding it or handling it when it occurs.
-Introducing an [[Uncertainty of Outcome]] is the main way of working against games having a [[Perdictable Winner]]. A way of achieving this through making players' goals uncertain is to use [[Secret Goals]] or [[Secret Scoring Mechanisms]]. The two main patterns that cause uncertainty in relation to winning against others are [[Performance Uncertainty]] and [[Player Unpredictability]].
+Introducing an [[Uncertainty of Outcome]] is the main way of working against games having a [[Predictable Winner]]. A way of achieving this through making players' goals uncertain is to use [[Secret Goals]] or [[Secret Scoring Mechanisms]]. The two main patterns that cause uncertainty in relation to winning against others are [[Performance Uncertainty]] and [[Player Unpredictability]].
 [[Balancing Effects]] can directly affect the actual chance that a game state will occur in which a winner is given, while [[Imperfect Information]] can be used to make it more difficult to judge to relative positions of players if the information is directly related to the winning conditions. [[Exaggerated Perception of Influence]] can do the same by giving misinformation regarding players' actual chances of succeeding with goals and actions in the game. [[Randomness]] can achieve both, but players with knowledge about statistics may be able to use this to be able to make reliable predictions anyway if enough random events are involved in the gameplay. When it is not also predictable whom will receive [[Rewards]] and these [[Rewards]] affect the winning condition, the use of [[Increasing Rewards]] can make winners less predictable.