UX laws we break to create immersive video games
In the realm of User Experience, we find the so-called ‘Laws of UX’, principles of human behavior and consumer preference. These laws are formulated by professionals from fields such as Psychology, Psychiatry, Neuroscience, Sociology, Economics, or Philosophy. Each rule focuses on aspects of designing interfaces and interactions.
The world of video games is different than the related field of software development. Although there is overlap, we can’t place video game design in the same area as software design, because it implies different kinds of interaction. With visual artists, musicians, actors, writers and directors involved at every step of the way, video games appeal to creativity and imagination just as much as technical functionality. Intention and immersion are important, as the player is constantly engaged.
With this in mind, we are proposing a thought experiment on how the Laws of UX relate to video games and how some of the rules could be either ‘upheld’ or ‘broken’ in favor of memorable gameplay. In this first part, let’s go over the rules that might be broken to create unique, immersive games.
Before we start, here are some of our own rules for this article:
🟣We’re using the Laws of UX website as reference.
🟣User is substituted for player.
🟣The rules are never entirely ‘broken’ in game design, just inapplicable in some cases.
🟣This is a thought experiment, everything should be taken with a grain of salt.
🟣Essentially, we’re just having fun with analyzing some UX concepts!
Law: Aesthetic-usability effect
Content: Users often perceive aesthetically pleasing design as design that’s more usable.
There’s no denying, in any visual medium, aesthetics may influence the general perception. However, since video games are a hands-on experience, functionality is the core of game design. More often than not, gameplay is at the center of all choices and even the design process usually begins with a prototype of the mechanics.
While picturesque landscapes, grand worldbuilding or cozy interfaces surely catch our eyes, there is no guarantee the design will be considered good if the gameplay is lacking. At the same time, when the mechanics are done well, the player’s imagination will fill in the blanks and create a sense of immersion.
There are many examples of great games appreciated by players and critics alike that do not focus on visuals. We could look for examples at retro games back in their days (before the style became iconic and a reference of its own). Also, indie studios might not always have the resources to focus on this aspect. Titles like Papers, Please or The Stanley Parable are well viewed in the world of game design without being known for their aesthetics.
Law: Choice overload
The tendency for people to get overwhelmed when they are presented with a large number of options, often used interchangeably with the term paradox of choice.
If we were to take this rule at face value, some games might easily be considered overwhelming. This would be incorrect, as the players appreciate certain titles specifically for their complexity. If we think about the intricate level design in Elden Ring, complex narrative structures from Baldur’s Gate III or the elaborate talent trees in Path of Exile, the myriad of choices is part of the appeal.
Usually, we associate good design with streamlined interactions and easy-to-use products. But in video games complexity is appreciated. Wondering through a labyrinth of options can be as immersive as a streamlined experience and when done well, the vastness of a world brings it to life.
Laws on cognitive functions: Cognitive Load, Miller’s Law, Working Memory
- Cognitive Load: The amount of mental resources needed to understand and interact with an interface.
- Miller’s Law: The average person can only keep 7 (plus or minus 2) items in their working memory.
- Working Memory: A cognitive system that temporarily holds and manipulates information needed to complete tasks.
Closely related, these laws refer to the resources of our working memory, advising designers to split information into smaller chunks so that users don’t struggle to absorb it.
We could argue that video games may intentionally break these rules to achieve difficulty, filling the screen with information and pushing the players’ cognitive boundaries with intricate, stimulating interfaces.
Let’s take as an example MMORPG titles like Destiny or World of Warcraft, in which players participate in difficult raids. The interface is flooded with information – abilities, damage numbers, boss mechanics, positioning, other player actions and environmental design, on top of aural triggers and narrative bits which may drop once in a while.
While all of this can be viewed as too much, for the players it’s part of the fun, it contributes to engaging and complex combat systems. In the end, the takeaway to Miller’s Law is that each person’s capacity varies depending on prior knowledge. In this case, players with a certain level of skill appreciate being challenged.
Law: Fitts’s Law
The time to acquire a target is a function of the distance to and size of the target.
Fitts’s Law is a great guideline for building icons and interactions as efficiently as possible. Icons should be the right size, buttons should be positioned properly, input should reflect the action, and so on. Interactions should be as natural and effortless as possible. This law is respected in the design of in-game menus or peripherals. But when it comes to actual gameplay, the rule can be broken intentionally once again to create challenge.
During gameplay, a certain level of mobility and speed are necessary to perform desired actions, which is why players train their dexterity comparable to how musicians or athletes train their muscles. Players are immersed in gameplay and their performance is a result of physical and mental training.
In Mortal Kombat, in order to achieve advanced attacks or the coveted fatality, players have to push button combinations that aren’t instinctive or natural. Platformers like Super Meat Boy 3D or Celeste intentionally change the environment and reduce the size of the target as part of the gameplay. In sports games, the target moves constantly, the time speeds up, the move sets vary.
Law: Jakob’s Law
Users spend most of their time on other sites. This means that users prefer your site to work the same way as all the other sites they already know.
Throughout video game history, genre expectations or platform requirements have formed. We might see the attack button placed on R1 for controllers or WASD used for movement on keyboards. RPGs might have talent trees, online FPS games might have loot boxes. There are surely general practices from which designers take inspiration, just as they would in the design of websites or applications. However, games are a playground for imagination and it’s not a bad thing to subvert expectations.
In order to create what they’ve envisioned, game designers might stray from what’s expected. Resemblance with other games could be faulted by the fanbase, if features are too similar it can be perceived as just a copy.
A recent example could be the combat model of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33. Players usually know what to expect from turn-based games – a strategic approach to combat, perhaps an isometric view, no actions during enemy’s turn. And here comes this game with a third-person perspective, giving the players a possibility to react to the enemy, completely changing the approach of turn-based systems.
Law: Parkinson’s Law
Any task will inflate until all of the available time is spent.
Parkinson’s Law is also about user expectations. In theory, the less time an action takes compared to what’s expected, the better the design. It’s a good practice to factor in the time users would expect a task to take and match it, preferably even beat it. This is a reminder to not complicate things unnecessarily. When it comes to peripheral input, menus and interfaces, this kind of optimization is necessary.
But designing gameplay adds again a layer of complexity. Repetitive tasks like farming and grinding are traditionally part of playing some games, and they fill the time longer than what players might prefer. Even interface input/output can vary depending on difficulty, as we discussed in some of the laws mentioned above.
And if we factor in an artistic direction, there is no optimization when it comes to time. How long do we think a game may take to complete? Maybe 30-60 hours for the average AAA title? Yet it would take over 500 billion years to explore all the maps in No Man’s Sky. An in-game cinematic usually is between 1-3 minutes, yet Death Stranding has a cinematic ending of two hours.
Law: Zeigarnik Effect
People remember uncompleted or interrupted tasks better than completed tasks.
Finally, Zeigarnik’s law suggests that designers should guide users towards completing tasks and motivate them along the way. There are situations in games where this is clearly applicable. A list of quests, inventory items, achievement trackers, map markers, are all means through which the player can be incentivized to return to a task. Environment design itself and NPC placing are also used to point towards a goal.
Even outside of the game, there are notifications, updates, marketing content and other types of activation which serve as a reminder for players to pick up where they left off.
However, let’s also consider in-game secrets, bonus content and buried narrative elements. Games also have hidden systems and randomly generated numbers (RNG) running in the background to make actions feel more realistic. In these cases, players have no indication of what they missed or how close they are to a goal.
Depending on preference, players will not necessarily go for the side quests, secret paths or unfinished actions. They might go straight for the main story and miss the rest, and that’s always fine when intended.
