Games are complex systems composed of numerous interacting elements. To truly understand how they work, or why players enjoy them, it’s essential to analyze these components and their relationships. This process is akin to baking a cake. Just as a well-crafted cake requires the right balance of flavors, textures, and visual appeal, a great game needs to harmonize its various elements to create an engaging player experience.
Over the years game design scholars have proposed various analytical frameworks for games to help understand and discuss the structure and fundamental elements of games. By examining how different frameworks approaches for analyzing games, we’ll gain insight into what makes certain games tick and why players respond to them in particular ways.
MDA Framework
The most popular game framework is most like the MDA framework published in 2004. Authors Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, and Robert Zubek developed the MDA framework as a formal approach to understanding games and bridging the gap between game development and design.
The MDA framework breaks apart a game into the following categories
- Mechanics describes the components of the game, at the level of data representation and algorithms. (ie. The Rules for the game)
- Dynamics describes the run-time behavior of the mechanics acting on player inputs and each others’ outputs over time. (ie. How the game is played)
- Aesthetics describes the desirable emotional responses evoked in the player when she interacts with the game system (ie. The player experience)
Aesthetics and Fun
The framework further defined aesthetics as “what makes a game fun” and breaking that into 8 key factors:
- Sensation: Game as sense-pleasure
- Fantasy: Game as make-believe
- Narrative: Game as drama
- Challenge: Game as obstacle course
- Fellowship: Game as social framework
- Discovery: Game as uncharted territory
- Expression: Game as self-discovery
- Submission: Game as a pastime
MDA Approach
According to the MDA framework designers and players view games from different directions. Far too often designers start with the mechanics of a game (what do we know how to build) instead of considering the aesthetics (what the player should experience).
MDA framework designers should first approach a game by deciding on the player experience (aesthetics) and then work backward to create the dynamics and mechanics that fit the chosen aesthetics.
MDA Limitations
While the MDA framework has long been a standard in the game industry, it is not without limitations. First, it examines games from a very broad perspective, which can obscure the finer details of player experience or design nuance.
Secondly and probably most notably, the term aesthetics is often misunderstood as referring solely to visuals, even though the framework defines it as the player’s experience and breaks it into eight distinct states. These states have also been criticized as an arbitrary list of emotional targets, lacking theoretical grounding and overlooking the full range of possible emotional responses.
Lastly, while the intent of the framework was to bridge the gap between game development and design, it has been criticized for emphasizing game mechanics at the expense of other important design elements, making it less suitable for certain types of games, particularly gamified systems or experience-oriented designs that prioritize engagement beyond traditional mechanics.
Keep in mind that while the MDA framework remains one of the most widely used models in game design, it is not the only framework available. Numerous other approaches have been proposed to address its limitations, providing alternative ways to analyze, understand, and design games.