Ever wondered how you can become so engrossed by those changing lights on a box? I mean, it is definitely cool that the lights change depending on what you do. Still, none of the things you do to the lights will influence reality, except maybe for increasing your energy bill. Unlike movies, game graphics are not even accurate depictions of reality. If you look at it that way, it is amazing that video games are so engrossing and rewarding. So how does it work? What motivates us to play games?
First off, for gaming to be any fun at all for someone, they must be willing to allow something called “suspension of disbelief”. Many people do not, and as a consequence they do indeed see gaming as an absurd pass time where sensible human beings devote hour upon hour to an unreality that looks nothing like real life. When you allow suspension of disbelief then you let yourself be sucked in by the fantasy, instead of criticizing inconsistencies and absurdities innate to gaming. Everyone has a different capacity and willingness to suspend their disbelief. Gamers are notoriously talented at it.
Yet why do they do it? Gaming does not satisfy physical needs as most of us do not play games for food or shelter. Instead it satisfies psychological needs. No one knows exactly what those needs are, but there are some plausible theories out there. Biology might give us a stepping stone toward where the answer might lie. Koepp et al. has found that a high release of a certain neurotransmitter makes people feel very “rewarded”. I’m not sure if that is the same as “happy”, but it is a good feeling nonetheless, and it will make you want to repeat whatever action gave that feeling. The neurotransmitter in question is dopamine, and researchers found that a successful gaming bout puts as much dopamine into your system as a shot of amphetamines. Dopamine fulfills a variety of roles throughout the body, but the most relevant of those is acting as reward and reinforcement for positive actions such as eating and sex.
And gaming.
So why do our brains respond so positively to gaming? We all play games for different reasons. Different researchers recognize different patterns in our motivations. Richard Bartle defined four gamer personalities based on ones playstyle and motivation. He recognized the “Achiever”, “Socializer”, “Explorer” and “Killer”. You can find out which you are here. The motivations for the Achievers and Socializers are clear from the name. The Explorers are novelty-seekers, while the Killers look for competition. This model is appealing in its simplicity but I have not been able to find what psychological model it is based on. Without a psychological model to support it, we are left to wonder if, for instance, novelty-seeking is a basic human need, or why in-game achievements are satisfying at all.
One psychological model that is intuitively appealing to many people is Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. There are 5 layers and the idea is that the lower down a need is, the more crucial it is to our wellbeing. We will seek to fulfill a lower need before moving on to higher one. Here the hierarchy is shown as a pyramid:
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
It is clear that gaming can hardly satisfy the first two levels. However, belonging, self-esteem and self-actualization can all play a role in gaming. Children asked about their motivations to play had widely different answers as you can see below.
Children's Motivations for Video Game Play in the Context of Normal Development - Cheryl K. Olson
“It’s just fun” and “it’s exciting” beg the question of why they are so fun and exciting. Some answers fit Maslow’s hierarchy, yet others do not. What basic needs are bored gamers fulfilling? And what about the need to escape reality? So-called “escapism” does not seem to be reflected in Maslow’s model yet some of these kids answer that gaming “helps me forget my problems”.
Other research looks at the gaming motivation of a slightly older target group of teenagers.
Digital game playing motives among adolescents: Relations to parent–child communication, school performance, sleeping habits, and perceived health
The most popular answer again begs the question: Why is gaming a good way to pass the time? Why is it entertaining? Again escapism is featured with “Get away from everyday life, forget worries”.
Of course, you could simply state “fun” as a basic need in life. This is done in Max-Neef’s theory of Fundamental Human Needs where they recognize 9 needs: subsistence, protection, affection, understanding, participation, leisure, creation, identity, freedom. Here leisure could be seen as the need for fun and entertainment. Yet, why would we have any such basic need? It has no survival value. It seems much more likely that leisure activities are fun because they either fulfill some purpose that benefits you as a person, or because your brain is fooled into thinking so, like in the case of drugs.
None of the psychological models I could find seemed to explain why video games are so rewarding. On the other hand, Bartle’s gamer types seem to ignore escapism for instance. There is one other prominent gamer typology out there: BrainHex Class. It divides gamers up in seven categories: Seeker, Survivor, Daredevil, Mastermind, Conqueror, Socialiser, and Achiever. Find out which you are here.
The problem with this typology is that it again does not provide for an escapist gamer. Also, a survivor and a daredevil are both have a lot of overlap with one looking for the thrill of a scare while the other looks for the thrill of speed. Most importantly, the model does not relate systematically to human needs.
Both the Bartle Test and the HexBrain Class aim to classify types of gamers based (mostly) on playing style. However, there does not seem to be any coherent psychological model of why we play games. I am trying to think what one should look like. I think I might be on to something here. Stay tuned for my Theory of Gaming Motivation.
Hey Shos,
While those models seem to grasp something of appeal of the video games they ultimately fail to grasp video game as a whole. I think the best way to look at video games is to look at everything else and see what video games bring that nothing else, be it the novel, movies or real life can.
I don’t think there’s any real argument to suggest that video games should be consider for their artistic value, so let’s focus on their entertaining value. Besides the internet, there is no other outlet that offers the high level of interactivity present in most video games. The ability for the player to have an impact on the game environment, on others players, CPU characters and events is unique to the video game, in comparison, we have little control or impact on the real world and real events, and we are mostly spectators when using other medium like tv, radio and books.
I can think of a couple of other points, but the gist of my take on this is the level of freedom, creativity and possibility of actions present in video games is unique to video games. But it is also due to that free spirit, creative and innovative nature of video gaming that the pleasure or interest we find in video gaming will always break the boundaries of any models we try to make it fit in, I wouldn’t be surprised if Social Games revolutionize video gaming in the next 10 years or so.
@Gareth Mensah: I definitely agree that the models I looked at missed the mark completely. I’m trying to figure out what a good psychological model of gaming motivations might be.
What would be unique about gaming versus other media & real life would be that it’s an experience simulator. Nothing else does that. You can get a taste of what it’s like to live out your fantasy in a setting that is closer to your daydreams than reality. Think of the reality of being a criminal and the daydream of acting out criminal fantasies. Video games don’t aspire to realism. They thrive off your daydreams. The “simulator” part of my answer is that interactivity aspect that you highlight.
So I more or less agree with you on what makes games unique in our lives. Yet I don’t think that gaming motivations are past modeling. Human nature can be analyzed and modelled based on biology and evolution. We might not have all the answers yet, but with enough research, we will find them eventually.
I like that, I the ‘experience simulator’ encapsulate what makes video games video games, and my point is a bit more philosophical than psychological, but as in the matrix, if you can’t tell the difference between what’s real and the simulation of the real, then maybe there is no difference. Point is, video games are still in their infancy, we’re just scratching the surface of what can be done with video gaming, whether it’s through augmented reality, virtual reality, social games or combination of those and other technologies, video games will soon make it hard, if not impossible to tell where they begin, and where reality or other media ends.
But a model that could anticipate all those possible evolutions of gaming and still point to a common psychological denominator would be invaluable.
@Gareth Mensah: I couldn’t agree more
I enjoyed the article very much.
Also, I’d like to ask why loading this site takes way too much time. It can take up to a minute for it to load properly.
@Derp: Glad to hear it
Do you still have the long loading time now? And if so, is it only for this one article? If it’s a structural problem like that, I’ll look into it!
Otherwise, I think it’s either some temporary web-admin of mine (should have been 6 in the morning East Coast time), or the server is acting up (which is outside of my control).
Hi Shos,
I have written a paper exploring the psycho-structural motivations behind persons playing games. I would be happy to discuss this with you further. I could not find contact details on your blog but please feel free to contact me – D.Westwood@mdx.ac.uk
Good luck and keep up the writing