How Bulletstorm encourages effective flow.

When designing Bulletstorm (2011), People Can Fly applied a unique combination of emergent game play elements and progressive level design in an attempt to encourage maximum engagement with a majority of audiences. Through in depth examination of the Skillshot mechanical system within Bulletstorm in regards to reward systems and flow theory, the strengths of Bulletstorm’s design and how it differs from other similar games in terms of level design and theoretical engagement can be examined.

Due to the complex nature of video games, designers must balance complex rule based systems which allow emergent gameplay with natural, flowing experiences. These two elements are known as “emergence” and “progression” (Juul, 2002). Juul further defined emergence as relatively simple rules which allowed for a large number of variations and progression as sequentially ordered pre-designed challenges. By integrating both emergent and progressive features in game mechanics, Juul suggests that designers can more effectively create a balance between complexity and simplicity.

People Can Fly can be seen to use both emergence and progression within their design of Bulletstorm. While the overall level design is very progressively structured and similar to similar contemporary  franchises like Gears of War or Halo, the familiarity allows players quickly acclimate to the game world and serves to further highlight the games emergent “core combat loop” or Skillshot system (Chmielarz, 2010, 2011). The Skillshot system provides players with a small number of set tools to use, and rewards them for combining these tools in different and imaginative way. By rewarding players for trying different combinations, Bulletstorm also create a highly positive feedback loop within their game, but avoid any potential negative side effects as the Skillshot system does not directly affect the game’s progression and players will always receive at least a few points per enemy (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004; LeBlanc, 1999).

In-game reward systems are an effective tool for motivating players within a game world and are, in many cases considered a necessary component for player enjoying, as without reward systems players don’t feel like they are accomplishing anything during play (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004). While there are many different methods of rewarding players, some of these systems can be broadly classified as glory, sustenance, access or facility. Glory systems reward players with points or trophies that generally have no direct effect on gameplay, sustenance rewards give players resources or items necessary to continue the game. While access rewards simply allow players to progress to new levels or areas and facility rewards allow the player to improve their character, usually by enhancing player abilities or by adding new skills (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004; Hallford & Hallford, 2001).

Though the research on reward systems focused mostly on role playing games, Bulletstorm’s Skillshot system can be seen to operate in a similar manner; as the system integrates multiple reward systems into its design. The Skillshot system most notably combines a glory reward system of scoring player’s for kills with aspects of sustenance and facility rewards by allowing players to unlock new weapons and to purchase ammo throughout the game by using there accumulated skill points. This use of score as a currency system is ultimately used to make the system more compelling, encouraging players to experiment with the systems and rewarding originality ensures that most players will experience at least a range of the different emergent elements.

This focus on engagement through an expansive reward system is ultimately a key component within Csíkszentmihályi’s flow theory when applied to video games. Simply put, flow is a mental state found in the correct balance between the level of difficulty in a task and the ability of the player (Csíkszentmihályi, 1996). By ensuring that a player is never so overwhelmed by a challenged, resulting in anxiety and frustration, or too skilled for the situation, designers can increase the appeal of their game. Rewards and feedback also form an important aspect of flow by allowing designers to expand the range in which players will experience the flow effect. If a player is feeling overwhelmed by the situation in game, by adding positive feedback, glory rewards or sustenance rewards designers will be able to offset negative emotions (Sun & Wang, 2011).

Bulletstorm’s Skillshot system design directly contributes to the flow of the game in this regard. By giving players more points for imaginative techniques and encouraging players to try new methods of defeating enemies, with the promise of more points for a new method than for repeating an old one, Bulletstorm makes it more difficult for the player to become too skilled and therefore bored of the game. Feedback within the game also forms an important part of the flow of Bulletstorm. The instantaneous scoring in Bulletstorm forms an instant feedback loop with the player by providing players with a score for each enemy; the player is less likely to find the engagement to challenging. Finally, the positive emotional affects of feedback (both accumulated feedback and instant) can serve to prevent players from losing interest in the game through both anxiety and boredom.

After examining the Skillshot system within Bulletstorm it is clear that combining emergent gameplay elements with progressive level design allows players to quickly accept and adapt to the game by providing a familiar environment to ground players while providing a large range of expansion for players to explore through the Skillshot system. This system, along with Bulletstorm’s unique combination of normal reward systems encourages flow within the game and provides an experience more likely to resonate with players. The Skillshot system therefore provides Bulletstorm with a point of difference from its rival combat based games, which mostly focus on progressive elements like large scale, set piece level design and “realistic” combat to express a narrative (Modern Warfare 3, 2011; Gears of War 3, 2011).

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References:

Bleszinski, C. (2011). Gears of War 3 [Video Game]. Published:  Microsoft Games Studios.

Bracken, C. C., Jeffres, L. W. & Neuendorf, K. A. (2004). Criticism or Praise? The Impact of Verbal versus Text-Only Computer Feedback on Social Presence, Intrinsic Motivation, and Recall
CyberPsychology & Behavior.  No. 3: 349-357

Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, New York: Harper Perennial

Hallford N. & Hallford, J. (2001). Swords and Circuitry: A designer’s guide to computer role playing games. Roseville, CA: Prime Publishing.

Juul, J. (2002).  The Open and the Closed: Game of emergence and games of progression. In Computer Games and Digital Cultures Conference Proceedings, edited by Frans Mäyrä, 323-329. Tampere: Tampere University Press, 2002. 

LeBlanc, M. (2004). Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics: A Formal Approach to Game Design. Lecture at Northwestern University, April 2004. Available at:

http://algorithmancy.8kindsoffun.com/MDAnwu.ppt [July 13 2012]

People Can Fly (2011) Bulletstorm [Video Game]. Published: Electronic Arts

Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E. (2004) Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Sayed, R. & Chmielarz, A. (2010) Bulletstorm: An Exclusive Interview With Adrian Chmielarz Creative Director of People Can Fly [Online] Available http://gamingbolt.com/bulletstorm-an-exclusive-interview-with-adrian-chmielarz-creative-director-of-people-can-fly [July 13 2012]

Sun, H. & Wang, C. (2011). Game Reward Systems: Gaming Experiences and Social Meanings [Online] Available http://www.digra.org/dl/db/11310.20247.pdf [July 13th 2012]