MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research

MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research
 Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, and Robert Zubek

I read a paper written by Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, and Robert Zubek entitled " MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research" which presents a formal manner of understanding the principals of game design and game development. The purpose of the paper was to assist in the breakdown of games into portions to enhance the iterative process for developers. MDA stands for Mechanics, Dynamics and Aesthetics. I'll break these down very quickly into bullet points and then expand.

- Mechanics are the rules, they are the constant things which never change and the player understands those rules.

- Dynamics are how the rules can be used and how they affect the players aesthetic experience, completely dictated by mechanics.

- Aesthetics evoke the emotional responses from players. Aesthetics are everything the player can actually see and interact with.

The different aesthetic components

1. Sensation - Game as sense-pleasure

2. Fantasy - Game as make-believe

3. Narrative - Game as drama

4. Challenge - Game as obstacle course

5. Fellowship - Game as social framework

6. Discovery - Game as uncharted territory

7. Expression - Game as self-discovery

8. Submission - Game as pastime

Example : Final Fantasy - Fantasy, Narrative, Expression, Discovery, Challenge, Submission.

Perspectives of MDA

Developers see the framework the opposite way a player would. A player would first see the aesthetics and experience those, as they play the game more they may begin to experiment with the dynamics of the game. In many games you can customize a lot, for example in a first person shooter game you may be able to change the mechanics slightly.

The way a developer will see MDA is exactly in that order. They will see the mechanics, then the dynamics those mechanics allow and then create aesthetics using what they already have. A player would experience the game before analyzing it and delving into the dynamics and mechanics too much.

How Changes Are Made

A key mechanical change made in 2011 to "Halo: Reach" was the 'no bloom setting' added by 343 Industries to answer the communities speculative complaints at the random bloom mechanic which forced players to fire shots in a more timely manner in order to hit accurate shots. Whether or not bloom was a good mechanic and worked well in the game is besides the point. What the release of a 'No Bloom Gametype' did was change the entire sandbox of the game. Weapons with faster fire rates were just as accurate and just as damaging as weapons with slower fire-rates because the sandbox was designed with bloom in mind.

Weapons such as the pistol which had a high fire rate but was balanced by the fact that you would need to pace your shots in order to stop the bloom from making your shots inaccurate became slightly imbalanced and could then kill much quicker if used by a more skilled player.

To Summarize

The point I'm trying to make with a rather simple to understand example is that any iterative change you make to a game needs to be thoroughly thought about. Any simple change can effect a players experience positively or negatively but with an understanding of the MDA Framework you're able to analyze how a change to the mechanics may affect the aesthetic experience of the game and not just that it will change the aesthetic experience.