I would like to discuss a topic that has been bouncing around in the back of my brain for a while now. Motivation is a core aspect of gaming, but I don?t really see it being handled correctly. To briefly summarize my thoughts, why you do something as a player is different from why your character does something. This may seem obvious and self-explanatory, but allow me to elaborate. The concept of motivation in gaming can be defined by whether the reason for doing something is intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic means an internal reason, like flying to the maximum height and falling onto someone/something just because it seemed like a good idea. Extrinsic means the reason for doing something is external, like carrying out an order from a superior officer. This can be simplified with the phrases ?I want to? and ?I have to.? ?I want to? typically implies intrinsic motivation, while ?I have to? implies extrinsic motivation. As a player, these phrases can often mean the same thing. ?I want to see what happens next? can be interchangeable with ?I have to see what happens next? in most contexts. However, when ?I want? and ?I have? start to have different meanings, it quickly becomes obvious and the overall focus is lost. The key lies making the main story and side quests engaging and rewarding, without the side quests turning into a distraction. Exploration, mini-games, scavenger hunts. All these should be additions that add to the experience and enrich the world and the game. If the side quests are more engaging and rewarding than the main story, then what you get is a player saying ?I have to do the boring part to unlock the fun stuff.? This means someone is not doing their job properly. As a player, motivation to do the main quest should be intrinsic. It shouldn?t feel like a chore to make progress. On the other hand, side quests shouldn?t be boring or unrewarding. If there is no incentive to do them, why have them in the first place? A side quest should always make you ask the question ?Do I have the time to do this?? If the answer is always yes, then the problem lies with the main story not being compelling enough. If the always no, then the side quests are either lacking incentive or the main quest is very compelling. If you are constantly answering no due to a compelling story, then the player is giving the game replay value to go back and see all the content.
I?ll come back to player motivation in a moment, but now I?d like to talk about character motivation. This is what really bugs me in a lot of games. Character motivation tends to be more extrinsic. Orders that come from the character?s boss or the character having some destiny to defeat a great evil. While extrinsic motivation tends to make writing a story easier (who can argue with ?Because I said so??), it can also make the character?s actions and the character themselves feel shallow. Answering the question ?Why did you save the world?? with ?Because I was told to,? can really undermine a sense of accomplishment. If the order came from a commanding officer, then you have to deal with the implication that the monumental task set out before could have easily went to some other guy. If destiny tells you to save the princess, then you really don?t have any other choice but to have the princess. A good way to blur the line between an intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation for a character is a sense of duty. When a character with a sense of duty receives an order, a genuine desire to accomplish that task makes its? completion a lot more fulfilling. One thing to remember is that duty does not come from guilt. While guilt is internal, it really counts as an extrinsic motivation. Guilt forms from societal pressure. If you make a mess, you have to clean it up. Duty comes from belief and devotion to a cause. If a character believes in what they are doing, then the player is more likely to rally behind that cause as well.
This brings me to my final point. In the ideal scenario, a character and the player should have the same goals and a complementary combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. I know I said earlier that player motivation should be intrinsic, and that?s still true. When I say a complementary combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, I?m talking about the idea that the best way to complete the main goal is to do these secondary tasks. To illustrate this idea, I?m going to cite Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword. I?m really only speaking from personal experience, but I?m sure I?m not just speaking for myself. I?m going to try to avoid some spoilers, but most have probably played it by now. With that said, let?s begin. During the Wing Ceremony, you get the sense that Link is motivated to impress Zelda and live up to her expectations, Those feelings transfer to the player pretty well, but as a player, I also felt an underlying sense of spite. You wanted to win just to rub it in the other guy?s face. This shows the concept beautifully. The goal is to win. The reasons for winning are Zelda, which is extrinsic, and spite, which is intrinsic. Later on, you are given the task rescuing Zelda while at the same time, you are informed you are the hero that has to prevent the revival of the embodiment of destruction. They continually state that saving the world is the more important of the two goals, but the impression you get from Link and that you feel as a player is that saving the world is really more of a means to an end, with the end being saving Zelda. Once again, we see the blending of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Extrinsically, it?s destiny. Intrinsically, it?s the girl. Even the villain, Ghirahim combines these motivation types. Extrinsically, he?s a threat to Zelda. Intrinsically, he?s a cocky tool you want to take down a peg, he?s creepy as hell, annoying, and even though you couldn?t see it due to the camera, he probably grabbed your ass. Are you really gonna let him get away with that?
While I?m sure there are other examples of goals and motivations merging seamlessly, Skyward Sword is probably one of the better cases. Anyway, I think it would be beneficial if we say more games that made motivation a more integral part of story and gameplay. It could definitely make things a lot more interesting.
I?ll come back to player motivation in a moment, but now I?d like to talk about character motivation. This is what really bugs me in a lot of games. Character motivation tends to be more extrinsic. Orders that come from the character?s boss or the character having some destiny to defeat a great evil. While extrinsic motivation tends to make writing a story easier (who can argue with ?Because I said so??), it can also make the character?s actions and the character themselves feel shallow. Answering the question ?Why did you save the world?? with ?Because I was told to,? can really undermine a sense of accomplishment. If the order came from a commanding officer, then you have to deal with the implication that the monumental task set out before could have easily went to some other guy. If destiny tells you to save the princess, then you really don?t have any other choice but to have the princess. A good way to blur the line between an intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation for a character is a sense of duty. When a character with a sense of duty receives an order, a genuine desire to accomplish that task makes its? completion a lot more fulfilling. One thing to remember is that duty does not come from guilt. While guilt is internal, it really counts as an extrinsic motivation. Guilt forms from societal pressure. If you make a mess, you have to clean it up. Duty comes from belief and devotion to a cause. If a character believes in what they are doing, then the player is more likely to rally behind that cause as well.
This brings me to my final point. In the ideal scenario, a character and the player should have the same goals and a complementary combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. I know I said earlier that player motivation should be intrinsic, and that?s still true. When I say a complementary combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, I?m talking about the idea that the best way to complete the main goal is to do these secondary tasks. To illustrate this idea, I?m going to cite Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword. I?m really only speaking from personal experience, but I?m sure I?m not just speaking for myself. I?m going to try to avoid some spoilers, but most have probably played it by now. With that said, let?s begin. During the Wing Ceremony, you get the sense that Link is motivated to impress Zelda and live up to her expectations, Those feelings transfer to the player pretty well, but as a player, I also felt an underlying sense of spite. You wanted to win just to rub it in the other guy?s face. This shows the concept beautifully. The goal is to win. The reasons for winning are Zelda, which is extrinsic, and spite, which is intrinsic. Later on, you are given the task rescuing Zelda while at the same time, you are informed you are the hero that has to prevent the revival of the embodiment of destruction. They continually state that saving the world is the more important of the two goals, but the impression you get from Link and that you feel as a player is that saving the world is really more of a means to an end, with the end being saving Zelda. Once again, we see the blending of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Extrinsically, it?s destiny. Intrinsically, it?s the girl. Even the villain, Ghirahim combines these motivation types. Extrinsically, he?s a threat to Zelda. Intrinsically, he?s a cocky tool you want to take down a peg, he?s creepy as hell, annoying, and even though you couldn?t see it due to the camera, he probably grabbed your ass. Are you really gonna let him get away with that?
While I?m sure there are other examples of goals and motivations merging seamlessly, Skyward Sword is probably one of the better cases. Anyway, I think it would be beneficial if we say more games that made motivation a more integral part of story and gameplay. It could definitely make things a lot more interesting.