Difference between revisions of "Shared Rewards"
(→Consequences) |
|||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[Category:To be Published]] | [[Category:To be Published]] | ||
[[Category:Staffan's current workpage]] | [[Category:Staffan's current workpage]] | ||
| − | '' | + | ''Forced sharing of rewards between players.'' |
| − | + | One part of the gameplay in most games is receiving rewards. When a reward needs to be split between more than one player, that reward becomes a [[Shared Rewards|Shared Reward]]. | |
=== Examples === | === Examples === | ||
| − | [[Left 4 Dead series]] | + | Winning is a [[Shared Rewards|Shared Reward]] in [[:Category:Co-Op Games|Co-Op Games]] such as [[Dead of Winter]], the [[Left 4 Dead series]], and [[Space Alert]]. Groups of player characters in [[:Category:Roleplaying Games|Roleplaying Games]] such as [[Dungeons & Dragons]] and [[GURPS]] often together defeat enemies, and then together need to share the rewards given for doing so. [[Shared Rewards]] can be said to be given to groups exploring instances in [[World of Warcraft]] since they have to divide loot they receive, and only those in an instance can receive parts. |
| − | + | In [[Carcassonne]] one possible way to gain points is to finish building a town but all players that have the same claim to the town receive the same amount of points. | |
| − | [[ | + | |
| + | == Using the pattern == | ||
If not already preset through the use of [[Teams]], etc., [[Shared Rewards]] can be designed around [[Collaborative Actions]], [[Mutual Goals]], or the effects that apply to [[Factions]] or [[Social Organizations]]. They can also be designed to be a consequence of [[Tied Results]]. [[Negotiation]] and [[Player-Decided Distributions]] can be used to let players have a say in how the [[Rewards]] are distributed, and making the [[Rewards]] into [[Shared Resources]] can postpone such discussions until latter. | If not already preset through the use of [[Teams]], etc., [[Shared Rewards]] can be designed around [[Collaborative Actions]], [[Mutual Goals]], or the effects that apply to [[Factions]] or [[Social Organizations]]. They can also be designed to be a consequence of [[Tied Results]]. [[Negotiation]] and [[Player-Decided Distributions]] can be used to let players have a say in how the [[Rewards]] are distributed, and making the [[Rewards]] into [[Shared Resources]] can postpone such discussions until latter. | ||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
== Consequences == | == Consequences == | ||
| − | Having [[Shared Rewards]] can form [[Mutual Goals]] between players, and is likely to cause [[Cooperation]] between them. It can also be the basis for [[Uncommitted Alliances]] or [[Teams]]. They modify how players can claim [[Ownership]] of the [[Rewards]] and can become focus for possible [[Social Interaction]] between them. | + | Having [[Shared Rewards]] can form [[Mutual Goals]] between players, and is likely to cause [[Cooperation]] between them. It can also be the basis for [[Uncommitted Alliances]] or [[Teams]]. [[Shared Rewards]] can make both [[Alliances]] and [[Competition]] stronger, in the latter case by setting up the "problem" of having to share [[Rewards]] as a threat. They modify how players can claim [[Ownership]] of the [[Rewards]] and can become focus for possible [[Social Interaction]] between them. |
As [[Rewards]] given to several different players, [[Shared Rewards]] can serve to create a sense of [[Togetherness]] between them. This can also have [[Balancing Effects]] effects if the distribution by the system or players give the most best [[Rewards]] to the weakest players. However, if the [[Rewards]] are not easy to split evenly, they may cause [[Social Dilemmas]] and some players may need to take on [[Social Roles]] handling this. This become most apparent when [[Uncommitted Alliances]] are given [[Shared Rewards]] due to [[Tied Results]] as the [[Rewards]] then become [[Player-Decided Distributions]]. | As [[Rewards]] given to several different players, [[Shared Rewards]] can serve to create a sense of [[Togetherness]] between them. This can also have [[Balancing Effects]] effects if the distribution by the system or players give the most best [[Rewards]] to the weakest players. However, if the [[Rewards]] are not easy to split evenly, they may cause [[Social Dilemmas]] and some players may need to take on [[Social Roles]] handling this. This become most apparent when [[Uncommitted Alliances]] are given [[Shared Rewards]] due to [[Tied Results]] as the [[Rewards]] then become [[Player-Decided Distributions]]. | ||
Revision as of 09:03, 8 August 2015
Forced sharing of rewards between players.
One part of the gameplay in most games is receiving rewards. When a reward needs to be split between more than one player, that reward becomes a Shared Reward.
Contents
Examples
Winning is a Shared Reward in Co-Op Games such as Dead of Winter, the Left 4 Dead series, and Space Alert. Groups of player characters in Roleplaying Games such as Dungeons & Dragons and GURPS often together defeat enemies, and then together need to share the rewards given for doing so. Shared Rewards can be said to be given to groups exploring instances in World of Warcraft since they have to divide loot they receive, and only those in an instance can receive parts.
In Carcassonne one possible way to gain points is to finish building a town but all players that have the same claim to the town receive the same amount of points.
Using the pattern
If not already preset through the use of Teams, etc., Shared Rewards can be designed around Collaborative Actions, Mutual Goals, or the effects that apply to Factions or Social Organizations. They can also be designed to be a consequence of Tied Results. Negotiation and Player-Decided Distributions can be used to let players have a say in how the Rewards are distributed, and making the Rewards into Shared Resources can postpone such discussions until latter.
Several patterns work against players having Shared Rewards. Conflicts and Excluding Goals among those with the Shared Rewards may interfere with their Cooperation or wish to share Rewards with the others. Individual Rewards are of course incompatible with Shared Rewards concerning the same Reward but the availability of Individual Rewards can also lessen the wish to strive for Shared Rewards. Some Altruistic Actions may somewhat surprisingly work against Shared Rewards since they can allow for players for forsake their part of the Rewards. Tiebreakers can be used to modify games that otherwise would allow Shared Rewards for Tied Results.
Shared Rewards work against the presence of Delayed Reciprocity since it either makes Rewards be shared at once or have distributions set out in advance.
Consequences
Having Shared Rewards can form Mutual Goals between players, and is likely to cause Cooperation between them. It can also be the basis for Uncommitted Alliances or Teams. Shared Rewards can make both Alliances and Competition stronger, in the latter case by setting up the "problem" of having to share Rewards as a threat. They modify how players can claim Ownership of the Rewards and can become focus for possible Social Interaction between them.
As Rewards given to several different players, Shared Rewards can serve to create a sense of Togetherness between them. This can also have Balancing Effects effects if the distribution by the system or players give the most best Rewards to the weakest players. However, if the Rewards are not easy to split evenly, they may cause Social Dilemmas and some players may need to take on Social Roles handling this. This become most apparent when Uncommitted Alliances are given Shared Rewards due to Tied Results as the Rewards then become Player-Decided Distributions.
Relations
Can Instantiate
Balancing Effects, Rewards, Mutual Goals, Social Dilemmas, Social Roles, Teams, Togetherness, Uncommitted Alliances
with Mutual Goals
with Tied Results and Uncommitted Alliances
Can Modulate
Alliances, Competition, Ownership, Social Interaction, Social Organizations,
Can Be Instantiated By
Collaborative Actions, Factions, Mutual Goals, Tied Results
Can Be Modulated By
Negotiation, Player-Decided Distributions, Shared Resources,
Possible Closure Effects
-
Potentially Conflicting With
Altruistic Actions, Conflicts, Delayed Reciprocity, Excluding Goals, Individual Rewards, Tiebreakers
History
An updated version of the pattern Shared Rewards that was part of the original collection in the book Patterns in Game Design[1].
References
- ↑ Björk, S. & Holopainen, J. (2004) Patterns in Game Design. Charles River Media. ISBN1-58450-354-8.
Acknowledgements
-
