Reality Check: Using Assumptions & Artificialities in Game Design

Why are there some games that we love, and those that we don’t?

Often, our love for some games and not others may be due to choices made during a game’s design (i.e. what to include, what not to include) in the final version. 

Games by design have a degree of abstraction; they are not reality or clones of the real-world. These abstractions are created during the game design process as deliberate “assumptions” and “artificialities.” These elements help build a game’s ground truth and mechanics to make the final product playable and hopefully fun!

Assumptions and artificialities refer to the inherent rules, structures, and conventions that shape how games function. These elements help define the boundaries and characteristics of a game. Like an engineering problem, you need to assume away variables that make the calculation slow or difficult but that will still give you the correct answer. Anything can be modeled; whether it’s useful depends on the accuracy of your assumptions.

It is critical to focus why you are designing a game, and what’s the most efficient way to get there? A game for entertainment is very different from a professional game to improve an organization. Let’s take Monopoly, the classic board game. It is a simplified and abstract representation of real-world real estate and property ownership. While it incorporates some elements of real estate, it does so in a highly stylized and gamified manner. 

• Players buy and own properties on the game board. These properties are stylized versions of real-world streets and landmarks, such as Park Place and Boardwalk. The board is a representation of streets of Atlantic City, NJ, in a very simple square format. 
• Players can improve their properties by purchasing houses and hotels which represent real estate development. House and hotels in the game are green and red plastic game pieces.
• When other players land on a property you own, they must pay rent, which simulates the income generated by real estate investments. 
• Players can trade properties with each other, which reflects the real-world practice of buying, selling, and trading real estate. 
• Monopoly even includes a mortgage mechanic where players can mortgage their properties for cash. 
• The game’s name itself highlights the concept of monopolies in real estate. When a player owns all the properties in a color group, they can charge higher rent.

However, Monopoly is a game; a highly simplified and abstract representation of real estate. It doesn’t capture the full complexity of real-world real estate markets, property management, zoning laws, or the financial intricacies of a real estate investment. The game’s primary focus is on strategy, negotiation, and competition among players rather than offering a realistic simulation of real estate economics. As a game, it uses assumptions and artificialities to make game play enjoyable. 

Assumptions and artificialities may be necessary to complete play in the time allotted or account for logistical limitations. Participants should accept that assumptions and artificialities are inherent in any game and should not allow these considerations to negatively impact their participation.

Assumptions. Game principles or expectations that players implicitly accept without proof when engaging in a game. 

They establish the basic framework of how the game world operates, and players use these assumptions to make decisions and strategize. These assumptions help shape the game’s mechanics and scenarios. Assumptions help designers strike a balance between accuracy and enjoyable gameplay, allowing players to engage in effective decision-making within the game’s framework.

Examples of assumptions in games: 

• Turn-based gameplay. Many board games and strategy video games assume that players take turns, which creates a structured and fair competition. 
• Objective-based gameplay. Scenarios often assume that players are motivated by specific objectives, such as capturing key locations or achieving strategic goals, even if real-world actions would be more complex. 
• Scoring rules. Games often have scoring systems that assume players aim to accumulate points, encouraging competition and strategic decision-making. 
• Knowledge of historical events or organizational plans. Designers assume that players have some knowledge of the actual historical events and strategies or organizational plans that can inform their decisions and tactics. 
• Balance of forces. Designers often assume a relatively balanced distribution of power between opposing factions or players to ensure competitive gameplay. This may involve adjusting unit strength, numbers, or capabilities. 
• Terrain and weather. Assumptions about terrain types, weather conditions, and their effects on movement and combat can simplify gameplay and create strategic challenges. 
• Bird’s eye view. In wargames, designers often assume that players have a high-level view of the battlefield, with access to an overview map, unit information, and intelligence reports that real commanders might not have. 

Artificialities. Game elements incorporated to facilitate play that are not true in the real-world. 

Artificialities are elements deliberately introduced into a game to create a controlled and structured experience, even if they deviate from real-world logic or norms. They help make the game challenging, enjoyable, or balanced, often by simplifying or abstracting complex real-world concepts. 

Examples of artificialities in games: 

• Unreal attributes. Some worlds may have magic, anti-gravity, or other non-physics based effects that help players achieve the game’s goals, and make play more fun!
• Logistics simplification. For a tactical wargame, the intricacies of logistics, supply lines, and maintenance are often simplified to keep the focus on tactical and strategic decision-making.
• Movement restrictions: In chess, pieces move in specific ways, an artificial representation of how different units might behave in a battlefield. 
• Respawn systems. In many video games, players and enemies can respawn after being defeated, an artificial concept that maintains game flow and allows for multiple attempts. 
• Hit points. Units in wargames frequently have hit points or a similar health system that simplifies combat and allows units to take multiple hits before being eliminated.
• Fog of war. To replicate the uncertainty of the battlefield, wargames often employ a fog of war mechanic where players have limited visibility of the map and enemy positions until they are within a certain range or revealed by scouting units.
• Hex grids or tiles. Grid-based movement using hexagons or squares is a common artificiality that simplifies movement and positioning, making it easier to calculate distances and engage in tactical planning.
• Stacking units. In some wargames, units are allowed to stack on top of each other in a single hex or square, even though this would not be practical or realistic in real-world military scenarios.
• Combat resolution tables. Rather than simulating each individual battle, wargames often use combat resolution tables or algorithms to calculate outcomes based on factors like unit strength, terrain, and leadership. 
• Limited intelligence. In scenarios where players control one side of a conflict, they may have more information about their own forces and objectives than the opposing side, even if both sides would realistically have access to the same information. 

Assumptions and artificialities are necessary in game design to create an enjoyable experience. Designers carefully balance detail with playability to ensure that the final game is both immersive and engaging.