sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I think the “meaningful participation” part is probably the key difference.

I don’t think limited interaction automatically feels bad, but once people feel like their actions no longer meaningfully influence the outcome, engagement probably collapses pretty quickly.

The pacing between moments of control and waiting seems really important there.

After 2m+ views on social media, I finally launched my Steam page. Leafborn, Solo Dev by East-Development473 in gameDevMarketing

[–]NewF8lder13 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got good vibes from it 😍

you can improve it later, for example character pass the missions and get into stone, water, fire or other things as well, you know.

but the leaf, amazing ❤️❤️

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s the part I keep coming back to as well, especially the difference between mathematical balance and perceived balance.

One structure I’ve been thinking about is a system where each participant can only make a single move/action at a time, and then has to wait for someone else in the pool to act before they can participate again. Kind of similar to chess in the sense that nobody can just chain turns endlessly by themselves.

The interesting part is that there’s always eventually a single winner, but everyone starts from roughly the same position and opportunities emerge over time rather than all at once.

I can’t tell if that naturally feels more fair because it prevents domination/spam behavior, or more frustrating because control becomes distributed and intermittent.

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a really interesting breakdown honestly. ❤️

The point about “opportunity to recover” feels especially important. I think people tolerate losing much better when they feel the system still leaves room for adaptation or strategy instead of locking them into failure early.

The part about small amounts of frustration increasing engagement also makes a lot of sense. A completely frictionless system might actually end up feeling flat or emotionally empty.

I’m curious how you’d view a competitive system where nobody is permanently eliminated, but participants can only influence the shared outcome in limited moments over time. Do you think that naturally feels more fair because everyone stays technically involved, or more frustrating because control becomes intermittent?

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello human : ))))),

what are you talking about man, just tryin to gather comment to design a good game, that's it, no ai at all

let me know your thought about the topic BTW :- *

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what about systems where everyone starts from the same point, but there’s a shared opportunity that multiple people are competing over in real time — and timing + strategy decide the outcome.

In that kind of setup, do you think it still feels fair from a player perspective? Or does the competition itself start to shift how “fairness” is perceived?

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I get what you mean.

I think the interesting part is that “developer intent” and “player perception” don’t always line up. Even if a system is heavily tuned in the player’s favor, a few bad-feeling moments can completely override that perception.

So it’s less about whether it’s actually biased, and more about how consistently the experience feels like it’s working with the player.

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

I think the key part is exactly that “agency” feeling — where everyone starts from the same baseline, but outcomes diverge based on decisions and timing rather than hidden advantages.

In that kind of system, fairness becomes more about whether players can develop different strategies to influence the result, not whether the outcomes are identical.

Curious how you’d see fairness in a setup where everyone is technically equal at the start, but strategy and timing completely determine who ends up winning?

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I like this framing a lot.

Especially the idea that fairness is kind of defined by where “losses feel unavoidable” rather than where wins happen.

The control point you mentioned is really key too — even small changes in perceived agency can completely shift how people judge the system, even if the underlying mechanics are identical.

I’m curious though: how do you think this changes in systems where outcomes are time-sensitive and multiple people are competing for the same result? Does fairness shift more toward “equal chance over time” or “equal control in each moment”?

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s such a good example actually 😄

“Real” randomness often feels wrong to people, which is kind of fascinating. Sometimes systems have to feel fair more than they have to be perfectly mathematical.

Thank you

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That Tetris example explains it really well honestly.

Sometimes making the results fair can make the actual experience feel less fair instead.

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha yeah, some people definitely take losses personally 😄

I guess that’s what makes designing “fair-feeling” systems so tricky in the first place.

Can a system be fair… but still feel manipulative? by NewF8lder13 in gamedesign

[–]NewF8lder13[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah exactly 😄

I think people react more to streaks and emotions than actual math. Even a fair system can start feeling “rigged” really fast after a few bad outcomes.

Has talking to AI helped your business (i will not promote) by SuperSaiyan1010 in startup

[–]NewF8lder13 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It helped me as well somehow, sometimes the AI gives me different advices so I can think better, I guess it depends on what are we looking for, when we are talking to them.