Breaking the rules for fun: when bad UX/UI makes great game challenges

In the realm of user experience and user interface design, the core principles revolve around clarity, efficiency, and ease of use. We strive to create intuitive pathways, provide clear feedback, and minimize frustration. However, the world of games operates under a slightly different set of rules. While good UX/UI is often crucial for onboarding and overall enjoyment, intentionally subverting these principles can be a powerful tool for crafting compelling and memorable challenges. Sometimes, the very elements that would be considered flaws in a productivity app become the cornerstones of engaging gameplay.

One common area where breaking UX/UI norms can be beneficial is in creating a sense of mystery and discovery. Imagine a game where the objective isn't immediately obvious, or where the controls are intentionally cryptic at first - like TUNIC as an example. This can foster a feeling of exploration and reward players for experimentation and problem-solving. For example, the early days of adventure games often featured obtuse puzzles with little to no in-game guidance. While frustrating for some, this forced players to think outside the box, share solutions, and ultimately feel a greater sense of accomplishment upon figuring things out. Similarly, intentionally vague item descriptions or map layouts can encourage players to meticulously explore the game world and piece together information.



Another instance where "bad" UX/UI can enhance gameplay is in creating a deliberate sense of difficulty or tension. Think of survival horror games where limited inventory space forces agonizing decisions about what to carry, or where a cluttered interface adds to the feeling of panic in a stressful situation. These design choices, while counterintuitive in most applications, actively contribute to the desired emotional response in the player. The clunky controls in early survival horror titles, often criticized for their lack of precision, actually amplified the feeling of vulnerability when facing terrifying creatures. The struggle to aim and react became part of the core gameplay loop, increasing the stakes of each encounter.

Ultimately, the decision to deviate from standard UX/UI practices in game design must be deliberate and serve a specific purpose related to the intended player experience. It's not about being arbitrarily difficult or frustrating; rather, it's about strategically employing elements that might be considered negative in other contexts to create unique challenges, foster a sense of accomplishment, or enhance the game's atmosphere. When executed effectively, these intentional "flaws" can transform a game from simply playable to truly engaging and memorable, proving that sometimes, breaking the rules is the most creative and rewarding path.

#GoGamers

The first time I noticed good level design in a game

I'm 46 years old. At this age, I can say that I was privileged to have witnessed the gaming industry's evolution from its earliest days. My first video game console was an Atari, a Christmas gift in the distant year of 1983 (when I was 4 years old). Back then, it was challenging to build a good game collection. I lived in the countryside of São Paulo (Brazil), and games took a while to reach there. Moreover, a cartridge was extremely expensive. My initial collection included Pac-Man, Missile Command, and Tennis. These games share something in common: they feature static screens, and the level challenge is correlated with scoring more points as the enemies get faster.

However, my perception of game level construction changed when I played H.E.R.O. (Helicopter Emergency Rescue Operations). If you'd like to experience it or relive the nostalgia, there's an emulator available here.



Of course, I had no idea of the term "level design" at that time, nor did I dream of becoming a game designer. But the game introduced me to exactly that: how to create a level of increasing challenge using game design components. In the following video, you can see a complete playthrough of the game's twenty levels.



On a limited platform like the Atari, it's evident that Activision performed a miracle by managing to incorporate so many challenges and features – despite the memory limitations of the time. The most interesting aspect is that H.E.R.O. showed me something that I began to look for in other games afterward (even at my young age): the possibility of traversing through varied scenarios with diverse challenges – at the end of this post, I will mention other titles in which I found this, still on the Atari.

As Adams and Rollings point out, level design is the process of constructing the experience that will be offered directly to the player, using components provided by the game designer. Level designers create the space in which the game unfolds, the initial conditions of the level, the set of challenges that the player will face within the level, the conditions for completing it, the interaction between gameplay and the game's story, and the aesthetics of the level. (2009, pp.399-400). Basically, something that we can summarize in the following image:  



Thus, we can say that H.E.R.O., along with other titles, inaugurated a creative thinking oriented towards level design on the Atari platform – just as, in this period, we also began to see computer games explore this feature with greater mastery. Levels that, in addition to offering the dangers of enemies, force the player to spend their resources intelligently and strategically.

H.E.R.O. was a milestone in my life. For opening my eyes to broader possibilities of experiencing games. Still on the Atari, two other games that marked me greatly for the same characteristic were Adventure and Keystone Kapers. Another change – within the question of level design – that changed my view of games were the rogue-likes. However, this is a topic for another post.

#GoGamers

---

Reference:

ADAMS, Ernest; ROLLINGS, Andrew. Fundamentals of Game Design. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009

Huizinga's Homo Ludens: an exploration of play and culture

Johan Huizinga, the Dutch historian (1872-1945), is a cornerstone in the study of games, playfulness, and playful interfaces in contemporary times. His seminal work, Homo Ludens, explores the centrality of "playing" in the formation of human culture. This post does not intend to summarize Huizinga's vast argumentation, but rather to highlight some of his theoretical points that still resonate today in the work of game creation.

In the book Homo Ludens published in 1938, Johan Huizinga delineates crucial characteristics for understanding the concept of play and its connections with human culture. The author postulates that play is an intrinsically free and voluntary activity (HUIZINGA, 2001, p. 3), presupposing the conscious acceptance and participation of the players. Furthermore, according to the Dutch historian, play is distinguished from everyday life, constituting a delimited temporal and spatial interval (HUIZINGA, 2001, p. 11). In this environment of fantasy and catharsis, players assume diverse roles, immersed in a universe distinct from the everyday (HUIZINGA, 2001, p. 15).

Play is also structured by rules that establish limits and define who wins and who loses or what are the actions allowed to achieve the objective of the game (HUIZINGA, 2001, p. 12-13). For, for the author, the function of the game, in its highest form, resides in the struggle for something or in the representation of something (HUIZINGA, 2001, p. 16).

Huizinga (2001, p. 65) also introduces the concept of the "magic circle" in Homo Ludens, a space of entertainment where participants transcend everyday concerns to surrender to a separate universe. Within this circle, the laws and customs of ordinary life lose their validity (HUIZINGA, 2001, p. 15-16). The author Ernest Adams (2009, p. 8), even, offers an elucidative representation of the magic circle: in the real world, people kick a ball into a net, but, in the magic circle, someone scores a goal that can enchant the fans of a certain football team.

Complementing Huizinga's thought, we bring to this post the text of Jacques Ehrmann, Homo Ludens Revisited (1968) which retakes and expands the reflections of Johan Huizinga on the nature of the game, offering a rich theoretical framework for the understanding of the ludic phenomenon. Ehrmann (1968, p. 55) argues that the game cannot be defined in isolation, but rather in relation to the culture and reality that surround it. This perspective resonates with the growing importance of narrative in digital games, where the player's experience is shaped by a set of meanings and cultural references.

The centrality of the player as "subject and object of the game" (EHRMANN, 1968, p. 56) highlights the interactive and participatory nature of digital games. The ludic experience in games transcends the mere manipulation of rules and elements, encompassing immersion in fictional worlds, decision-making and the construction of personal narratives.

By observing the thinking of these authors, we conclude that - to understand games in contemporary times - it is fundamental also to look to the past and, above all, to learn to connect the social with the ludic.

#GoGamers

---

References:

ADAMS, Ernest. Fundamentals of Game Design. New Riders, 2009.

EHRMANN, Jacques, et al. Homo Ludens Revisited. Yale French Studies, 41, p. 31-57, 1968. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2307/2929664.

HUIZINGA, Johan. Homo ludens. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 2001.

The significance of artificial intelligence in contemporary game design

In this post I want to briefly discuss the importance of artificial intelligence in the gaming industry. As Togelius (2024) highlights, AI is increasingly prevalent in our daily lives, and games, as prominent elements of the technology industry, are no exception. While the author acknowledges that some recent AI systems exhibit a degree of generalizability, most remain highly specialized: they can only perform a single task within a specific context. For instance, a spell checker cannot perform mathematical calculations, and the world's best chess program cannot play Tetris.

As Togelius (2019) also says, recent advancements in artificial intelligence have significantly enhanced our capabilities, particularly in the realm of game development; as we continue to explore and refine these techniques, their potential applications within games extend far beyond the traditional role of providing skilled opponents. It is imperative that we adapt our game design methodologies to fully leverage the power of advanced AI algorithms and to understand how to use generative AI to help us to create better game designing practices.



Therefore, artificial intelligence has been a constant companion in the evolution of video games, shaping the way we interact with virtual worlds. From the very beginning, AI in games has sought to simulate intelligent behaviors in non-player characters (NPCs), making gaming experiences more immersive and challenging. According to Millington (2009), the early stages of AI in gaming were modest, with simple algorithms determining basic movement patterns and reactions of NPCs. However, as technology advanced, so too did the possibilities. Today, AI in games is capable of generating complex and adaptive behaviors, making NPCs more realistic and challenging. Based on the ideas of Togelius and Millington, it is important to observe the evolution of techniques enabling the use of artificial intelligence in recent decades. Comparing 1962, when MIT students interacted with the Space War game prototype on a static screen with minimal input commands, to 2017 and Echo game, where enemies learn from the player's combat patterns and become increasingly dangerous and unpredictable, highlights this dramatic progression. Since 2017, advances have not stopped and, every year, we are surprised by a new use of AI in games.

In other words, when contemplating the application of AI in gaming, we are not merely considering the development of more efficient adversaries that learn from player behavior or environments that adapt to the specific challenges a player seeks. AI tools can be instrumental in brainstorming processes and in establishing the foundational pillars of game creation. Particularly for small-scale studios and producers with limited resources, access to generative AI tools can serve as a powerful asset to facilitate game development.

 #GoGamers

---

References:

Millington, I., 2009. Artificial Intelligence for Games. Burlington: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Togelius, J., 2019. Playing smart - on games, intelligence, and artificial intelligence. London: The MIT Press.
Togelius, J., 2024. Artificial general intelligence. London: The MIT Press.