The Worse Version of Chaos
A few weeks ago, I posted a shitfilter link to a Flash game called Chaos Theory. Yesterday, Tomo graphic artist Guillermo IM'ed me a link to A Chain Reaction Game v.2. I don't know if there's an explicit connection between the two obviously similar games, but even if there isn't, the v.2 version is an excellent example of how to add a load of features to something and make it much worse.
The original Chaos Theory is diabolical in its simplicity. It depends on a random setup (the initial dispersal and trajectory of the balls is different every time) to drive repeat play, but the player's success is dependant on both skill and luck.
The derivative Chain Reaction Game adds prettier graphics in a variety of skins, gives the player musical choices, adds a leaderboard (that does not seem to be global), and changes the gameplay by sending balls balls from every direction and removing the limit on the number of balls per level. And for all these "improvements," the game is much, much worse. Rather than an addictive game that begs just one more play (until suddenly, an hour has passed) we have a game that's boring the third time.
Removing the ball limit removes time pressure; the player can sit forever waiting for the perfect storm of ball density... and yet, it doesn't matter much. The endless ball streams make the initial explosion's placement almost irrelevant to the player's ultimate score, as becomes obvious to the player in about four minutes.
There are other examples of things that have gotten worse from improvement (bad UI, worse reward scheme), but the really important thing, to my mind, comes back to the balance between skill and luck in the game. I recently read an analysis of the casual web games Poppit and Bejeweled that included this gem:
What most makes Poppit addictive, however is randomness. Poppit seems to be a game of skill. But it is really a game of chance. How well you do is determined largely by the randomly chosen starting position, just like in the card game Solitaire.Ultimately, A Chain Reaction Game v.2 utterly fails this "Solitaire" test. It's more like a slot machine. But without the potential for a real payoff in Earth Monies, a slot machine is capable of holding your interest for, oh, about 20 seconds.It's gambler psychology. When you're winning you feel lucky and want to keep playing. When you're losing you feel like you want to play again so you can do better. Either way, you keep playing just one more game. As you learn in Psychology 101, nothing is as addictive as a random reinforcement schedule.
Comments
Got to agree with you - I was stuck playing Chaos theory for about an hour at work a couple of weeks ago... By the third attempted "game" of v2.0 I was bored out of my mind with it...
Good observations. Enjoy your blog...
Excellent analysis, Jeff. The first Chaos Theory has randomness in the right places (dispersal of incendiary balls) but order in the right places as well (number of balls, general ball trajectory) so you can sort of strategize your timing, looking for that peak where the right number of balls are in the air or about to begin falling back down. This new entry reverses that, to disappointing effect. Even though it was called Chaos Theory, in the first game you kind of felt like you were entering this controlled environment. If you paid attention and worked at it, you might be able to get all 50. (And suddenly, an hour has passed.) (And another.)
Besides, I actually prefer the simpler, more elegant graphics, and the instructions in a language I don't read. (And we all know fewer preferences are better.) I'll pass on the music; iTunes is already handling that responsibility quite ably, thank you.
Also, if you're in the market for highly addictive games, may I suggest Lux, which is like RISK on steroids, and offers online multiplayer options. So far, I've only played it in the configuration that most mimics the RISK board game (I'm a purist. And a baby.) but even in basic mode, it still combines the insane addictiveness of the board game with awesome pyrotechnics!
Okay, I just tried both games, and you're entirely right. It goes from, "Try to catch as many as you can." To: "Click, and watch the pretty colors."
You'd think the designer might have noticed that his game wasn't very engaging at some point.
It seemed like Chaos Theory was less of a game than a programming lesson for the designer that also happened to be a fun passtime. Meanwhile, this Chain Reaction game seems to be less of a game than an over-done reaction to a possible statement made by a bored time-waster playing Chaos Theory: "Sometimes I just blast the incoming dots right at the bottom as they come in and see how long I can make the explosions last."
I've done this. Of course, that's not a game, it's a palette cleanser. There's a parable in the tale of Chaos Theory and Chain Reaction about responding to and building on what your customers are doing with the game versus actually developing the gameplay. Put it another way: Somebody has developed the product, but not the game.