Engagement Curves

Creating engaging games are what designers are always trying to do. Making sure that the game is challenging (but not too difficult). Making sure that the game is fun (but not too easy). Making sure that the game is impactful (but not too serious).

Maintaining this engagement is hard. How do designers do it? How do educators make sure that they maintain the focus of their students? Specifically, how does engagement help educators make serious learning games?

This article will address the “engagement curve” of games and how it affects player and user engagement. It will cover what should be prioritized when creating engaging games as well as how timing works in the engagement cycle. This curve is discussed for continual player engagement as well as how most popular apps utilize this for monetization purposes. Finally, this article closes out on why engagement is important for games and how it can be harnessed for serious game development.

What is an engagement curve?

The engagement curve is a way for designers to make sure that players remain engaged in the game according to a pre-determined rhythm. This is especially helpful for those players who are playing in a new environment for the first time. For us, there was always a first time that we played a first person shooter; a worker placement game; or explored an open world RPG. For experienced gamers these places now come as second nature to us. But, for ALL of us: there was always a first time.

That means that engagement at the very beginning is important for players. The engagement curve is a chart of the intensity of this player engagement over time.

But this engagement curve isn’t seen only in games. You can find it in other mediums like stories, narratives, books, movies, and music. The engagement curve identifies the “ideal” amount of player engagement to keep them interested, challenged, and intrigued.

However, in more static mediums like books, movies, television shows, and stories: this engagement curve cannot change. It has been pre-written; pre-edited; and pre-recorded. That means there is no change for the user as they progress throughout the process. But games are different: they can change as their players engage with them. Games can deliver a different amount and type of feedback.

What should we design for?

Designers need to think about first time users when taking the engagement curve into account. This may not have been the first game that they’ve played before. But it’s their first time playing *this* game. That means that bringing them on board to the world; the “controls,” and their decision space is paramount.

That means that designers should focus on the progression system for players. Specifically, what actions they’ve taken and what decisions will affect their play throughout the game. This gives player engagement meaning as they can determine the arc that they’ve progressed in throughout their play.

This leads to the creation of an “ideal” curve. One that has high moments of intensity matched by equally low moments of rest. This “ping pong” effect of back and forth means that players are gradually introduced to different and impactful effects in the game. They are then given “benign” and baseline moments in which to use them.

This is most prevalent in video game tutorials where players are shown how to move; run; jump; or crawl and then must explore a world where they can do all of those motions in order to help them navigate the space. Only later will they need to rely on what they’ve learned here in order to proceed in the game.

Often this tutorial is built into the story of the character. As stories have a more lasting effect than straight “tutorials,” players are lead through narrative conventions where they must “stretch” and move around in a space in order to learn how to use the controls for the game. This decision makes sense thematically as well as connects player actions within the realm of the narrative.

Though sometimes, player are thrust into a dire situation where they must now use what they’ve learned in the game for their benefit. A memorable example of this for me was playing through Dead Space for the first time. I was put into a situation where I immediately needed to put all of movement actions (turn, look, run) to the test in order to escape a band of necromorphs that were chasing me. It’s one of the first few heart pounding moments in the game that represents one of the first peaks in the engagement curve.

That chase then ends in a quieter navigation throughout the Ishimura where the character has a chance to “relax” for a bit before encountering additional challenges. That up-down effect in engagement and action represents this engagement curve throughout the game which mimics a roller coaster in many ways.

This engagement curve is also reflected in the narrative analogy with the three act play: setting up the incident which leads to the confrontation which then climaxes and reaches the resolution of the story. This intensity throughout the engagement curve is based on the timing of this action and the demands of the player as they navigate the game.

Timing in engagement

Timing is the most important aspect of the engagement curve. The experiences of the player happen over time as they engage with the game. In board games, this timing can take place in multiple intervals. Most likely with a starting setup of players; followed by earning points or synergizing different elements; and then ending with a climax or a payoff.

Ancestree was a new game that I picked up recently that embodied this. The starting setup for players was built on a single tile. The rest of the game revolved around building from that tile with each round ending in scoring opportunities. However; the decision to use that tile at the beginning informed the rest of the play throughout the game. The conclusion of each round represented scoring opportunities. This was the falling action and setup for the next round.

There’s a connection here between game design, narratives, and serious games. Here, players need to become active participants in the process instead of passive observers. That means that once they have a “competency” in the game - once they learn how to do something - they should then have a quickly rising opportunity to put it to the test.