Gamasutra: The Art & Business of Making Gamesspacer
arrowPress Releases
September 21, 2014
PR Newswire
View All





If you enjoy reading this site, you might also want to check out these UBM Tech sites:


 
Sixteen ways to motivate - is your game tapping into them?
by Gabriel Recchia on 02/21/13 09:47:00 pm   Featured Blogs

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutraís community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.

 

From Motivate. Play.


7 Habits of Highly Effective People. The 8 Essential Steps to Conflict Resolution. I’ll be the first to agree that including an arbitrary number in a headline makes an article sound like something that you’d find in the bargain bin of your local bookstore, but in this case there’s a rationale.

In a series of studies from 1995 to 1998 that investigated fundamental human drives/motives for action (status, hunger, sex, etc.), Dr. Steven Reiss and colleagues started with a list of “every motive they could imagine,” including hundreds of possibilities drawn from psychological studies, psychiatric classification manuals, and other sources.

They whittled this down to a mere 384, and distributed a survey designed to measure the importance that survey-takers assigned to each motive to over 2,500 people.

Plugging the results into a factor analysis to find out how many distinct underlying dimensions were necessary to account for the majority of variance yielded 15 distinct clusters of motives that people rated as of particularly high importance. (They added one more in 1998). In no particular order, they are:

Reiss' 15 Fundamental Motives

Based on Multifaceted Nature of Intrinsic Motivation: The Theory of 16 Basic Desires, Table 1.

This is at odds with the reigning approach of dividing motivations up into extrinsic vs. intrinsic, and is much messier from a theoretical perspective. But as the psychologists who conducted the studies argue, there’s no reason to expect that an adequate theory of something as complex as human motivation should be anything but messy.

We have over 50 distinct cortical regions, over 100 different neurotransmitters, and thousands of proteins. Why not at least a handful of innate motivational categories?

Certainly, the theory has its flaws. There is ample evidence that people don’t have a good grasp of what really motivates them (which puts limits on what we can learn from surveys), and the theory doesn’t do justice to fact that our reactions to “things we want” vs. “things we want to avoid” are subserved by different neural systems. But it certainly provides an interesting perspective.

Many designers were astounded at the popularity of Farmville, whose key mechanics flew in the face of received game design wisdom, and Zynga’s continuing demise has been heralded by some as proof that the intrinsic motivation provided by a good game ultimately trumps the extrinsic motivation of praise and badges. Maybe so.

But it’s also possible that the motives that Farmville’s core mechanics tap into—accumulating items (Reiss’ “saving” motive) and the desire to give a Green Whatsit to someone who gave you a Blue Doohickey (reciprocal altruism, which falls under Reiss’ “idealism” motive)—are not inherently ‘worse’ than other motives, just hard to sustain in the long term in the absence of other motivating features. Arguably, many good MMOs take ample advantage of both of these motives and many more besides.

My previous post highlighted some of the difficulties of designing intrinsic motivators into a game. Even if the intrinsic/extrinsic distinction is a meaningful and important one to make, the difficulties of navigating this space in a real-world game may make multi-factor theories more useful to game designers in practical terms.

In particular, they can be used as “lenses” in the sense of Jesse Schell in The Art of Game Design, which contains 100 thought-provoking lenses through which one’s game can be viewed and improved. One can imagine developing corresponding lenses for each of Reiss’ fundamental motives (e.g. “The Lens of Independence: Does my game make people feel autonomous? Do players have a sense of control over their actions? Do they feel free to select from meaningful choices?”)—and in fact, Schell’s list already includes several that are relevant to some of the motives above (The Lens of Competition, The Lens of Cooperation, The Lens of Needs, The Lens of Control, The Lens of Community).

(Drawing up lens cards for Reiss’ remaining motives, and designing a game that satisfies the motives of “desire to eat,” “desire for sex,” and “desire to raise own children” is left as an exercise to the reader.)

Although most designers already have a sense of what motivates their audience, focusing one’s attention on the sixteen dimensions that have emerged as particularly important in large-scale studies of human motivation may be a worthy endeavor, if for no other reason than to identify which motives one’s game already addresses best, and to evaluate whether ramping those up even more would improve it further.

In addition to features that conventional wisdom suggests are motivating to players (rewards for skill development, compelling narrative, gradually increasing difficulty, etc.), ’16 Basic Desires’ theory may inspire further ideas for underappreciated features worthy of consideration.


Related Jobs

Blizzard Entertainment
Blizzard Entertainment — Irvine, California, United States
[09.19.14]

Art Director - World of Warcraft
SAE Institute
SAE Institute — San Jose, California, United States
[09.19.14]

User Interface Design Instructor
SAE Institute
SAE Institute — San Jose, California, United States
[09.19.14]

Compositing Instructor
HITN
HITN — Brooklyn, New York, United States
[09.19.14]

Associate Producer/Game Designer






Comments


David OConnor
profile image
Very interesting, thank you for sharing. It would be interesting to map them with the standard business school motivational models, like Maslow's 'Heirarchy of Needs'.

PS. It is 'whittle', not 'widdle' (widdle = urinate) ;)

Gabriel Recchia
profile image
It would indeed -- the most-cited paper on this actually refers to Maslow's hierarchy as another example of a multifaceted theory of motivation, if I recall correctly.

Whoops, thanks for pointing out the typo! Fixed.

Bart Stewart
profile image
Agreed, interesting findings here.

I do wonder if there's more internal structure among these 16 motivations than Reiss et al. suggest, though. Motivations can be seen as pretty fundamental impulses.

Looking at the Reiss motivations, I think most of them can be grouped by deeper goals:

Sensation: Power, Exercise, Sex, Eating
Security: Vengeance, Honor, Family, Order, Tranquility (safety)
Knowledge: Curiosity
Identity: Idealism

The five other Reiss motivations seem to apply to multiple goals. For example, Order (organization) is particularly important to both the Security and Knowledge goals.

But it's fascinating that the counts of the Reiss motivations for each goal -- whether multi-goal motivations are counted or not -- are a remarkably close match for the numbers of each personality style as revealed by Myers-Briggs research.

MB studies of Western populations, grouped into temperaments, show almost the exact breakdown as these clusters of Reiss motivations: in the general public there are a high percentage of externally-motivated sensation- and security-seekers (with slightly more security-seekers), and a relatively low number of knowledge- and identity-seekers. To the extent that computer games have gone mass-market, we're now seeing similar proportions in the gameplay preferences of gamers in large groups.

If anything, that suggests to me that both Reiss and MB models are seeing the same real patterns of basic motivations in the general population. 2500 people is not a huge sample, so I'd want to see Reiss's research tested on a larger scale. But it's intriguing just the same.

Incidentally, I ran across an interesting paper on using Reiss's model to design NPC behavior systems: http://sbgames.org/sbgames2012/proceedings/papers/computacao/comp
-short_03.pdf .

Gabriel Recchia
profile image
That's a nice insight, particularly given that Reiss puts a lot of emphasis on the fact that there are striking individual differences in how much people are driven by each motive--he theorizes that we have innate set points for how much we desire each, and that too much/too little puts us into disequilibrium. An introvert, for example, might have a low set point for "social contact". So it is a little bit like a trait theory.

Although some circles pan the Myers-Briggs as unscientific, four of the "Big 5" traits in Five Factor Model (which has been validated about as rigorously as one can validate a trait theory) actually correlate fairly closely with the MB dimensions. I hadn't thought about a connection to Bartle's gameplay preferences until you mentioned it, but I'm sure there is. Always neat to see people from different disciplines converging on the same basic ideas.

Heng Yoeung
profile image
It seems some of these motivations can be grouped under a broader umbrella. For example, power, vengeance and order can be placed under "subjagtion of nature". Western culture is very rational, scientific, which is opposed to the (perceived?) mystical of Eastern culture (ying vs. yang). The underlying basis of modern science is echoed by the words of Francis Bacon, whose view was that nature should be subjugated to the rigors of empiricism (I think the precise word was rape, instead of subjugation). The reason I would place these motivations under an umbrella is because, if it is true, "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny". In other words, that man wants to subjugate nature harks back to a time when nature was perceived to be danger: lions, tigers and bears, oh my.

Another umbrella would be consumerisim for the trio of eating, saving, and cursiosity. Again, it certainly jibes with the Western way of life, a disposable society as someone said. For example, an iphone is bought in one year and in the next iteration, it is garbage. There is a hunger in Western society that things like electronics and food temporarily provide. Meanwhile, some are realizing that meditation might be the way to curb this desire. Thus, the infusion of meditation in the West.

Anyway, just some thoughts. Feel free to shoot it down.


none
 
Comment: