Mechanics, Dynamics and Aesthetics

Thinking critically about games is more than just "is this enjoyable to play?" When we look at a game and reflect on it, we should be thinking about more than "did we have fun playing this?" Yes, that matters but to be better designers, players, and critics we should have an understanding of all the aspects of the game. For some people, this is probably something we all know but didn't know we knew. Say that five times fast.

I was recently introduced to the MDA model of game design and research. This is a model put together by academics from MIT and Northwestern University. It gives us a way of thinking about the technical aspect of games and how those aspects interact with each other in order to create an experience. Now, MDA stands for Mechanics, Dynamics, and Aesthetics. I was mildly thrown off by the definition of aesthetics used in this model. My background in communication and rhetoric uses aesthetics in terms of visual literacy, but in this model it means something closer to "feeling" or "experience." Other then that, mechanics and dynamics probably mean exactly what you think or at least close to it.

If you're interested in reading the MDA, it's a five page document that's fairly accessible. I've provided a link so you can check it out, download it or share it.

I share the MDA because it got me thinking about Dominion. It's not exactly my favorite game, matter of fact, I'm so tired of it I wouldn't mind never playing it again. But the MDA provided me with a new way of thinking about the game. Sure, it's a bunch of stuff that I tacitly understood already but it gave me a framework and approach to thinking about Dominion more critically, other than "man, I'm sick of this game."

For the sake of clarity, I'm not denying the power/importance of Dominion and what it means to the board game world. My personal preferences have shifted and changed over time, likely due to the amount of plays I have of the game. Imagine eating the same exact sandwich three times a day for five years, you'd probably be tired of that too.

Being able to think about games more critically, I think, will help with designing games. No brainer, right? I had to put together an MDA analysis for Dominion the other day. After doing so, it gave me a new perspective on everything that is going on in the game. Instead of just seeing a game that I've grown quite tired of, I was able to take a step back and look at it as a game system and see where that game system lead.

Here is the MDA breakdown I put together for Dominion - keep in mind, there is no right or wrong. I've probably missed things and it's purely from my experience playing the game. Others in the class had completely different breakdowns. This is no way an extensive or exhaustive list.

Mechanics
Shuffling
Action
Buying
Dealing
Victory Points
Attacks
Blocks (ex- moats)

Dynamics
Timing
Keeping track of your purchases
Keeping track of others purchases
Strategic decisions
Luck of the draw

Aesthetics
Investment
Challenge
Frustration
Control
Tension
Unknowing

One of the points that stood out to me when I reviewed this list was investment. I made the list on the fly, writing down whatever came to mind. When it came to reflect on the notion of investment, I wasn't quite sure what I was going for. On the surface, investment seems pretty straight forward - you invest in cards to use - but that's not what I meant. After some thought I come to the conclusion that I was talking about personal investment in your deck, not the act of purchasing.

Each time I play Dominion, I become invested (committed could be another word) in the deck that I am trying to build. I prefer to participate in randomized games when I have to play because I feel the game is too easy to strategize with some of the more popular purchase fields, and if everyone knows the strategy - it comes down to luck of the draw. More or less, every game I play is completely different than the one before or the one last week. Playing this way allows me to become invested in my hand in a completely different manner. I'll have to assess each option I have, consider a plan, and then begin to execute that plan. The level of commitment can be pretty intense if I'm noticing that I'm falling behind - usually by this point, it's too late for a complete overhaul in strategy. I'm invested in the strategy and deck I have built and must follow through with that until the end, even if I have set myself down a clear path of crap. Most times, pulling the "Oh! I'll buy a market now to try and correct this failure of a deck" is too little too late.

In a way, it's a bit like when you're pot committed in poker. There isn't a whole lot you can do except see it through until the end - for better or for worse.

The investment you feel can be a good and bad thing. For a newer player, it makes their deck feel like their own. They built it and if they win, it's quite the feeling of accomplishment, while quite the contrary if they lose. For veteran player's, I think the gusto is a bit more tame. You'll know when you're falling behind and you'll probably know that you're going to lose about midway through the game if your plan isn't working, which could lead to a sense of hopelessness or carelessness before the game is done. The randomness of your shuffled deck may help a bit, but with skilled players - it's likely not to be enough.

In the end, I believe for newer to moderate players the feeling of investment and accomplishment that comes from creating a successful deck is huge. Coupled with all the other aspects of the game, I think it's a great introductory game to get new players thinking strategically without throwing them into Terra Mystica or something like that.

Looking at Dominion through the lens of MDA helped bring me to a different understanding of the game. It's more clear, objective, and less spiteful. While playing Dominion over the past week, I've rekindled my interest in the game, but for purely academic reasons. I no longer dread pulling out the box and offering to play a game or two, so I can think more critically about what is happening in the game. We all think critically about our's and other's games and that's a good thing, but it never hurts to think critically in different ways - ways we may not be familiar or comfortable with.

You never know where that will lead you.

-Charlie