I initially published this post in my personal blog Quarterview.com. Check it out to learn more mobile gaming design techniques, analysis, and industry opinions.

Context

Before gameplay, mechanics, monetization, or any other key design consideration, a new video game design needs to consider the most important aspect of all: a good concept.

Feature film screenwriter Terry Rossio (credits include Shrek, Pirates of the Caribbean, Aladdin, and many others) developed the notion of a "Strange Attractor" to help other screenwriters understand how to create compelling film concepts for movie audiences. This was further adapted and refined for books by authors from the group Writing Excuses. Without such a concept Rossio argues: "Very often the screenwriter has picked, from the start, a concept that even in its best form isn't the type of story that sells to Hollywood."

Video games (like movies and books) are just another entertainment medium in which the principle of a strange attractor applies. In this post, I:

What is a "Strange Attractor"?

Terry Rossio (from his website) describes the strange attractor as follows:

The principle of a strange attractor requires that you give your audience something they can easily understand and that feels intriguing and compelling to try. Whether it's a movie, a book, or a game, the initial attraction needs to be there to get someone to give the product a chance.

In the free to play game space this principle primarily impacts:

Strange Attractor Formula: Familiar + Strange

Authors from the group Writing Excuses more concisely summarize the a strange attractor as mixing the "familiar" with the "strange." As Howard Tayler from Writing Excuses puts it:

Some good examples mentioned by the Writing Excuses authors in fiction include:

In addition, some additional key insights the Writing Excuses team mention:

Strange Attractors in Video Games

So what about games?

The relevance of the strange attractor principle to games becomes more clear with the understanding of one further wrinkle: the impact of competitive intensity.

For example, the requirement for a strange attractor generally differs by platform based on competitive intensity (number of available titles) on that platform: millions of apps in the app store for mobile vs. relatively few titles published every year on console means that console titles garner much greater individual attention. Hence mobile titles in general typically have a higher requirement for a strange attractor. See below:

Further, within say the mobile gaming platform, each game market will have different levels of competitive intensity e.g., there are only a few MOBAs (“multiplayer online battle arena” games like League of Legends) hence unique differentiation not so necessary as making yet making another “Clash of Clans” type of game requires a strong strange attractor.

Mobile Game Examples

Let’s examine some examples of strange attractor use in practice. A good current example of the strange attractor principle is the recent launch of DomiNations by Big Huge Games. On the face of it, just another Clash of Clans clone, but the Big Huge team were able to create a compelling product by juxtaposing the notion of Clash of Clans gameplay (the familiar) with the age evolution concept from Civilization (the strange).

In games, we must message the strange attractor both in the marketing of the product but also in the initial/early game experience.

See the DomiNations game HUD below:

Users can immediately see the differentiation from Clash of Clans: the art style, roads, hunting & mining, garrisons, resources, build gating system, and of course the progression of the town hall into new ages of civilization. All of these things add to the unique flavor of the game and message differentiation to the user. Again this is critical for a highly competitive genre.

Key Point: The user must be able to quickly and easily see and understand the unique differentiation.

No Strange Attractor Example

Clash of Lords 2 by IGG serves as a good example of a game with good gameplay (arguably much better than existing competitive product) but I would argue that because it lacked a strong strange attractor was unable to generate audience interest. In fact, IGG launched two Clash of Clans-like games: Castle Clash and Clash of Lords 2. However, IGG achieved some success with Castle Clash yet failed with Clash of Lords 2.

What happened?

IGG launched a very small iteration to Clash of Clans but did it relatively early - 1 year after Clash of Clans - and was the first game to add the idea of hero units to the gameplay. Launched in October of 2013, that incremental gameplay was just enough to help Castle Clash gain fairly decent traction and has been a top 50 - 170 grossing game from that period. However, 1 year after Castle Clash, IGG followed up with Clash of Lords 2. By this time the Clash gameplay and the notion of heroes had become cliche. Therefore Clash of Lords 2 failed to gain much traction despite having better gameplay (e.g., active skills in battle, hero troop units, hero gacha fusion) than Castle Clash.

Why?

As you can see from the above, the two games look very similar: from color to art style to UI structure. Unfortunately for IGG, the differences in the gameplay don't quickly come through to the new game player.  In fact, a new player jumping in can't clearly understand what is cool and compelling about the game and with hundreds of clones to choose from, the new player will quickly bounce out. Hence, although a better game, there is no strange attractor and I submit the key reason why the game failed to achieve much commercial success.

In Traditional Video Games

In console gaming we see much less need for the use of strange attractors given the relatively few titles launched on consoles every year. More generally, console titles tend to compete based upon production value (e.g., graphics), brand, story, and proven team/developer (e.g., Bungie/Kojima). However, even in this space we have seen a number of titles that have arguably been significantly helped by the presence of a strange attractor:

In the PC gaming space, we see greater use of strange attractors in games but I would argue that teams should still think more carefully about this concept before developing their games.

As a current example, take the recent explosion of games in the open world survival horror category without much high-concept differentiation: DayZ, Rust, H1Z1, The Forest, Survive the Nights, Frozen State, Dying Light, etc. etc. As greater competition enters the market, the audience will no longer care so much about the cool new gameplay mechanic but instead focused more on what is the strange attractor to help garner the new player's interest.

Conclusion

Anyone competing in a highly competitive game category needs to consider what the strange attractor for their game is. Designers also need to be cognizant of their market and audience. For the particular game category, ask these key questions:

Opportunities exist for smart developers who can think through key competitive gameplay categories on any platform - where gameplay risk typically has largely already been de-risked - and (with solid game design) determine the strange attractor that will get them the new player attention to give their game a chance.

Before you start your new game project, ask yourself: What is my game's strange attractor?