next »

[kirtov]

I know this is a pretty broad question and depends a lot on the game genre and the type of player the game is targeting, but let's discuss the general aspects that makes a player go back again and again to a video game.

For instance, a mechanic that makes a game addictive for me, it's the ability to improve your hero: gain levels, upgrade armor or weapons, get new spells or power-ups, etc. Most of the time we see this mechanic in RPG, but it can be applied to any kind of game (ex. in a puzzle game you can gain the ability to do some special movements after reaching a specific score).

So, what makes a game addictive for you?

[Canned Turkey]

I don't really get addicted to games, being a designer at heart, I can catch on when someone is just setting up a Skinner box for me. Side note, you are a horrible person if you resort to psychology to make a bad game addictive, I will hate you forever if you do. Anyway, for others, what really makes a game addictive is how easy it is to keep playing. Look at any game labeled "addictive", and it's restart option is probably just a button press after death. For me, I can't get enough out of pick-up-and-play hardcore games. That would be Spelunky, Nuclear Throne, Isaac, Rogue Legacy, Risk of Rain, and others. I also spend a lot of time on games with customization.

[bdsowers]

I can't get enough out of pick-up-and-play hardcore games. That would be Spelunky, Nuclear Throne, Isaac, Rogue Legacy, Risk of Rain, and others.

I also have this issue. Jetpack Joyride. Hypership Out of Control. Nimble Quest. The most addicting games are the hard ones where I feel like I could do better if I just tried one more time, and that's only a touch away.

I tend not to get addicted to the bigger games anymore - I just don't have time - but growth and regrowth certainly played a role. I played Monster Ranch to death because I could grow up a monster, but then it would die and I had to grow up another monster.

[BudaDude]

I believe having something like a "quick round" with a small reward.

For example:
In a game like GameDev Story, you create a game in seconds and make alot of money from it.
In Jetpack Joyride, you usually die pretty quickly but you get a spinwheel at the end, so you don't feel bad about it too much.
Candy Crush rewards you for solving shortish puzzles with flashy graphics and deep voiced men.

[valrus]

Overlapping with the feeling-of-improvement, having your effort be acknowledged and meaningfully rewarded.  Most people don't get enough of that in their lives (from bosses/teachers/parents/spouses/children), which is among the reasons people game.  We like to spend time in universes that feel more just and fair about rewarding accomplishment.

That doesn't mean a Skinner box rewarding you for clicking a button, more along the lines of figuring out what accomplishments in the game players feel are justly deserving of rewards, and rewarding them proportionally.  I had a game that players found a bit too frustrating because people were coming up with lots of valid and interesting inputs that the game wasn't acknowledging.  The more I manage to actually recognize and reward those player inputs, the more often I hear that the game is addictive.

Also, it's important to understand what in your game is genuinely rewarding.  As the designer, you might not know at first; you might just have to ask players who liked the game, "what was rewarding about playing it?"  It might be a surprise.  Whatever it is, feed that to players in amounts proportional to their accomplishment.

The other responses are very good, too.  A short, tight core game loop is really important, with as little as possible getting in the way of the observation-decision-action-feedback loop. And little tricks to get players right back into the game when they get derailed somehow (dying, etc.)  Restarting in one touch, getting a powerup to use in the next round, getting a new random mission... Even just feeling that you've learned something that you can apply next time; every time you die in a good roguelike you think "Welp, now I know a little something more" and that's motivation to play again.  Sid Meier has a quote where he calls that "planting the seed of 'the next time' in the player's head".

[baconman]

I don't really get addicted to games, being a designer at heart, I can catch on when someone is just setting up a Skinner box for me. Side note, you are a horrible person if you resort to psychology to make a bad game addictive, I will hate you forever if you do. Anyway, for others, what really makes a game addictive is how easy it is to keep playing. Look at any game labeled "addictive", and it's restart option is probably just a button press after death.

For me, I can't get enough out of pick-up-and-play hardcore games. That would be Spelunky, Nuclear Throne, Isaac, Rogue Legacy, Risk of Rain, and others. I also spend a lot of time on games with customization.

1. Barrier to entry. How hard is the game to learn? The less you have to memorize of your controls, and the more you can memorize of the content (strategically), the better.

2. Goals. This goes along with that positive feedback to the player thing mentioned above. There's a lot of goals you can give the player, but by pointing them out, and rewarding players for achieving them, you can vary their playstyles and experiences intentionally. Collectathons, speedruns, time survived... the more you can vary your goals - but keep them involved in the core experience, the better.

3. Play scale. A game that gets replayed a lot is a game the respects the player's time - doesn't take up too much of it, but at the same time, offers a rewarding experience, and yes, the "try again" factor. These examples all do that, and do it well. Even if you have a long, cinematic experience, just break that up into natural play segments, like Half-Minute Hero does.

4. If you can make online leaderboards, do that. The problem most social games make is that they FORCE the social element on the player. But ALLOWING openly social aspects into your game for players who CHOOSE that option, often via scoreboards or the like, is a terrific thing. Super House of Dead Ninjas, for instance, allows "champion" enemies to be give your Steam friends' NAMES. :D

[Muz]

1. Something cool happens. Guy declares war on me. I get an awesome new unit. I'm on a winning streak. I'm about to turn around a losing streak.

2. The action needed is really easy. Not cumbersome like Xenonaut maps or not needing a 10 min chunk of time.

3. Some acknowledgement or reward for my action. Level up. New loot. Significant rise in rank (if it's a pvp game).

4. Some investment. Plant seeds in farmville. Hire new guy in Football Manager. Unlock a new artifact in RPG. Build train or highway system in a city sim.

5. An element of uncertainty. Random loot drops. 10% chance of aliens killing my best guy. Tank gets destroyed by spearman.

[Ammypendent]

The good games use Flow.

The bad games use skinner boxes.