Player Engagement Optimization

by Noah Molloy

The most popular games are marked by their ability to capture players' attention. Long and frequent play sessions are characteristic of games with good player engagement. Player engagement (sometimes called player retention, player churn, player attrition, or player turnover) is a measure of how players positively or negatively experience a game. High amounts of player engagement translates to longer play sessions and more player satisfaction. Conversely, low amounts of player engagement results in shorter playtime and an overall negative gameplay experience. While utilizing player engagement optimization is important for game developers, they also need to keep in mind of the legal ramifications behind player optimization when real money is involved. Due to the loose regulations surrounding player engagement that use "loot boxes," or randomized rewards, some game developers have maliciously used the ability to capture a player's attention to profit financially.

Engagement Methods

There are several ways to provide players with an engaging experience. These center around the idea that players want to experience some aspect of a game, usually chasing some sort of goal. These goals can be fairly abstract or more concrete with clearly communicated objectives given to the player by the game.

Player Engagement Process

Player engagement is a process. The player engagement process (PEP)^2 is a circular link of player states that are directly influenced by game design. Players are first motivated to complete objectives. To complete these objectives they must engage with some activity within the game. Players that participate in the activity experience affect. This affect can be either positive or negative. From here the cycle repeats until the player no longer wishes to interact with the cycle, usually due to one of the link-states being stuck or broken.

Objectives

Developing a game with a focus on player engagement starts in the design of the gameplay loop. Developers should carefully consider what experiences they have to offer to the player. These pursuits can be categorized into two fields, intrinsic objectives and extrinsic objectives^2. Intrinsic objectives are player-imposed objectives that offer no direct in-game benefit. Extrinsic objectives are goals set by the game. For example, how a player might build a house in the popular game Minecraft is an intrinsic objective. Players can fashion their house to whatever style they may like or might not feel the need to build a house at all. In the extrinsic case, something like collecting all the coins in a Super Mario level is a goal set by the developers. In either case, the player is actively pursuing some goal with the pay-off being some sort of satisfaction.

Activities

Activities describe the central game mechanics players interact with throughout the game itself. In a golf videogame, a player might need to correctly time their virtual swing to maximize their driving power.

Accomplishments

Accomplishments are a way to allow a player to show off what they have achieved in game. These accolades may be tied to completing both intrinsic and extrinsic objectives. In either case, provisions must be made to allow players the ability to distinguish themselves from their peers based on personal performance.

Affect

Affect refers to the mental or physical state of a player at the end of the PEP cycle. Feelings of satisfaction, physical exhaustion, or frustration are some of the possible affects that may arise from playing. It is important to avoid mechanics that may produce negative affects for players.

Real-time Analytics

After core gameplay elements are developed and in-place, it may be difficult to optimize player engagement if a certain strategy did not yield the desired results. Player engagement may be restored by the use of real-time analytics to fine tune parameters in specific engagement scenarios. When attempting to integrate real-time analytics, it is essential to establish which metrics are important and what weight should be assigned to each category. While every game is different in how they are structured, there are a few core metrics that should be recorded and acted on.

Another example comes from "Left 4 Dead 2", developed by Valve Corporation. In this 4-player, zombie survival, hack n' slash, shoot-em-up, players are tasked with reaching the end of the level while fighting against hordes of the undead. Despite being released in 2009, the game still boasts player counts that surpass many other modern-day games. These player counts are sustained by what is known as the "AI-Director"^4. This director ensures that each playthrough for a given level is unique and poses enough of a challenge for the players. If the director notices that players are struggling to get through the level, it may spawn more power ups and supplies to aid them. If players are breezing through checkpoints too quickly, it may spawn additional hordes of zombies. This dynamic nature keeps the game feeling fresh and challenging each playthrough.

Many modern game engines include real-time analytical capabilities. Unity is one such engine that enables developers to gain insight on player performance in real-time. However, developers need to be cautious when implementing any real-time service. Machines have finite processing power, which makes the necessity for good resource management essential.

Win/Success Rate

Contrary to what intuitively makes the most sense, players winning in a game too much may end up less engaged than other players. While it's obvious that players that are constantly losing will want to stop playing, players that continue to win may end up feeling unsatisfied with the game^1. They might feel that they have already mastered the game mechanics and that there is no reason to invest their time to improve.

An Electronic Arts funded research project conducted jointly by UCLA and Northeastern University discovered how to minimize churn and increase player retention. In a scenario where players participate in a game set where the outcome can either be a win, draw, or loss, the most likely string of outcomes to cause a player to stop playing is three straight losses in a row. Interestingly, the second most likely string of game outcomes to cause a player to stop is two consecutive wins and an ending loss. In general, if the last game in the set is a loss, there is a higher chance of a player becoming disinterested. The strings of outcomes to least likely cause a player to stop playing are combinations of wins, draws, and losses where the last game in a set is either a win or a draw. In fact, a player who experienced two consecutive losses and an ending win is actually more likely to continue to play versus the two wins one loss case.

Below is a table of their findings for a three-game set.

Fixed Random Chance

During gameplay, random events with set probabilities can have the likeliness of certain events occurring modified in such a way to drive up player satisfaction^3. With real-time analytics, a game can recognize that a player has had a string of bad luck or experienced multiple consecutive losses. The game can then act upon that trend of negative experiences by forcing the probability of a positive event occurring to keep the player interested in the game. This can take form in things like random loot chests found in the game world that might contain rare equipment or a random chance of a critical hit during combat that results in the enemy taking a larger than normal amount of damage. This fixing of chance can be either visible to the player or hidden, depending on what the developer is attempting to accomplish. Most of the time it should not be noticeable to the player that the game is fixing things in the background but there are times where showing the game is adjusting odds can have a positive effect. For example, if a player has a chance to open a crate with a low chance of obtaining a rare item, the game might show that the chance of obtaining a rare item has increased over the last time. This will encourage the player to continue to engage with the game so that they can try to find an additional source of loot and have an improved chance of obtaining the rare item.

Applications and Controversies

The efficacy of fixed random chance events is evident through its widespread use across game types and regions. Most games with any type of online interaction utilize the concept of making events that are supposedly “random” not so. Among the most popular online games currently, games including Counterstrike (CS-GO), League of Legends (LOL), Hearthstone, Minecraft, Fortnite and Apex Legends all take advantage of loot/ loot box mechanics to entice and engage their players. Many of the above-mentioned games even incorporate part of these “random chance events” as a part of their strategies. A majority of popular online games above are free to play, leading to the bulk of the revenue from these games being generated from in-game purchases. Subsequently, to maximize the revenue, these in-game purchases often employ player retention strategies, including fixing “random chances.”

The usage of fixing random chances often borders ethical grey zones and may even trespass existing legal boundaries. If the model of selling loot boxes with probabilities sounds like gambling, then you are right in that it very much resembles gambling. However, disparate from gambling, the legality of loot boxes is not clearly defined and leaves much room for interpretation. Unlike a city like Las Vegas where gambling is strictly regulated and followed, the current lack of discourse allows gaming companies to use gaming loot boxes as a legal Wild West to generate profit.

The plethora of past and current litigation serves as an impetus to make transparent some of these player retention methods, especially in regard to purchased services such as loot boxes. Blizzard, the company behind Hearthstone and Overwatch, was recently involved in a class action lawsuit regarding their card packs. One of the main concerns the plaintiffs argue is that the company has never disclosed the probabilities behind the loot boxes.^5 This lack of transparency encourages players to continue to spend money on the game, in hopes of obtaining a rare item; in turn it allows the company to further profit.

The failure to disclose probabilities is perhaps the lease malign tactic used by gaming companies to churn player retention. In many parts of Asia, where the online gaming industry is even less strictly regulated, some companies blatantly fix chances to deceive customers. One of the most high-profile cases recently is the legal battle in South Korea against the company Nexon, notable for games like Maplestory and KartRider^6. Nexon engaged in deceptive practices where the company sold loot boxes and “promoted the boxes as giving out pieces at random, but the chance of getting some of the pieces was just 0.5 per cent.” Having been found of the deceptive practices, the company was handed a nearly $1 million USD fine^7. Similarly in Taiwan, a local streamer and former professional League of Legends player sued the gaming publisher Juzi for deceptive practices. The suit was awarded in Dinter’s favor, along with damages of NTD 20.7 million (~$650 000 USD)^8. The publisher was found guilty of deceptive practices that manipulate loot probabilities to attract players and encourage in-game spendings.

Legal battles and controversies regarding loot boxes and similar methods continue to arise frequently. Despite often paying out large amounts in damages, the companies continue to use these probability fixing methods. Perhaps this action speaks to the efficacy of fixing chances to keep the player engaged, after all, no one like to continuously lose and everyone thinks that they will eventually win. While using chance fixing as a means of player retention may not be inherently illegal, by combining with the purchasing aspect of some games does border ambiguous judicial status. Thus, it is best if chance fixing steers clear of any economic behaviors.

Conclusion

When developing a game, solving how to get players engaged is the penultimate problem. Design choices should be made to provide players with an enjoyable experience they want to invest their time into. Technical issues and poor gameplay design are the biggest factors that negatively affect a person's time with the game. The gaming industry is one of the most competitive markets. If someone likes a game, they play it. If they don't, they will quickly abandon it and move on to something else that can pique their interest. While it is important for game developers to keep their player base interested, they should also do so responsibility and ethically as to not maliciously profit from players and commit fraud. Similarly, regulatory bodies should keep a closer eye on these player retention methods, especially one that involve financial transactions.

References

1. Chen, Zhengxing, et al. EOMM: An Engagement Optimized Matchmaking Framework, www.web.cs.ucla.edu/~yzsun/papers/WWW17Chen_EOMM. Accessed 4 June 2023.

2. Schoenau-Fog, Henrik. “The Player Engagement Process – an Exploration of ... - Digra.” Digital Games Research Association, Jan. 2011, www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/11307.06025.pdf.

3. Dunning, Johnna  L. “Examining Slot Machine Play with Varying Percentages of Losses Disguised as Wins.” Southern Illinois University Carbondale, Dec. 2012, www.opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1395&context=gs_rp.

4. Champandard, Alex  J. “Learning to Win: Case-Based Plan Selection in a Real-Time Strategy Game.” AI Game Dev, 7 Oct. 2009, www.cs.drexel.edu/~santi/teaching/2012/CS680/papers/RTS-Aha.pdf.

5. Batchelor, James. “Blizzard Faces Poposed Class-Action Lawsuit over Hearthstone Card Packs.” GamesIndustry.Biz, 19 May 2022, www.gamesindustry.biz/proposed-class-action-lawsuit-forming-against-blizzard-over-hearthstone-card-packs.

6. Handrahan, Matthew. “Nexon and Netmarble Fined for Loot Box Practices.” GamesIndustry.Biz, 10 Apr. 2018, www.gamesindustry.biz/nexon-and-netmarble-fined-for-loot-box-practices.

7. Ji-young, Sohn. “Nexon Korea to Challenge FTC’s Hefty Penalty.” The Korea Herald, 2 Apr. 2018, www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20180402000884.

8. newsdirectory3. “Dinte Sues Game Juzi, Claiming 20.7 Million in Damages in ‘Paradise m’ Usage Dispute: 4 Gamers.” News Directory 3, 18 Sept. 2022, www.newsdirectory3.com/dinte-sues-game-juzi-claiming-20-7-million-in-damages-in-paradise-m-usage-dispute-4-gamers/.