game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit

Name: game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit
Author: Stanestane

34stars3forks

How to install game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit?

stanestane/game-design-skills-bundle/game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit

$npx -y skills add Stanestane/game-design-skills-bundle --skill game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Audit a game, feature, live-ops system, onboarding flow, progression loop, social feature, monetization flow, or return loop for player need satisfaction using Self-Determination Theory and the PENS lens. Use when evaluating whether a design is actually fun beyond surface KPIs, d

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Game Design Player Need Satisfaction Audit
2
3	Audit a design by asking whether it satisfies core psychological needs rather than merely driving activity.
4
5	Use this skill to examine whether a game, feature, or live-ops system supports autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and where it may be denying those needs instead. Keep the analysis practical and design-facing. Treat fun as need satisfaction rather than as a vague entertainment label.
6
7	## Core principle
8
9	People do not play games only because they are interactive or rewarding. They play because games satisfy core psychological needs. A feature can have solid metrics, clean progression, and monetization hooks, yet still feel emotionally weak if it fails to satisfy these needs.
10
11	## Need lenses
12
13	### 1. Autonomy
14	The need to feel like a causal agent of one's own actions.
15
16	In game terms: meaningful choice, ownership, self-directed action, strategic freedom, and perceived control.
17
18	### 2. Competence
19	The need to feel effective, capable, and progressively more skillful.
20
21	In game terms: clear goals, understandable feedback, mastery, successful execution, improvement, and meaningful progress.
22
23	### 3. Relatedness
24	The need to feel socially connected, embedded, recognized, compared, valued, or bonded with others.
25
26	In game terms: cooperation, rivalry, status visibility, shared progress, belonging, social ritual, and social meaning.
27
28	### 4. Benevolence (optional)
29	Use this supplementary lens when the design includes helping, gifting, nurturing, stewardship, caretaking, or contribution to others.
30
31	## What to produce
32
33	Generate an audit with these outputs:
34
35	1. Need satisfaction profile - how strongly the design satisfies autonomy, competence, and relatedness
36	2. Need denial profile - where the design frustrates or blocks those needs
37	3. Mechanism map - which systems create or reduce satisfaction
38	4. Risk diagnosis - where the design is emotionally hollow, coercive, or overly one-dimensional
39	5. Improvement recommendations - targeted design changes to improve need satisfaction
40
41	## Process
42
43	### 1. Define the audit target
44
45	Clarify exactly what is being audited.
46
47	Possible targets:
48	- full game
49	- core loop
50	- new feature
51	- onboarding
52	- event structure
53	- social system
54	- monetization flow
55	- return loop
56	- session opener
57
58	Write:
59	- Audit target
60	- Player context
61	- Why this audit matters
62
63	### 2. Map intended player experience
64
65	Describe what the design is supposed to make the player feel and do.
66
67	This step prevents theory from floating free of the actual experience.
68
69	Ask:
70	- What is the intended player fantasy?
71	- What actions define the loop?
72	- What are players choosing?
73	- What are they trying to master?
74	- Where are they encountering other people, directly or indirectly?
75	- What does success look like from the player's perspective?
76
77	Write:
78	- Intended player experience
79	- Core actions
80	- Sources of progress
81	- Sources of social meaning
82
83	### 3. Audit autonomy
84
85	Ask whether the design helps the player feel like an active agent rather than a passenger.
86
87	Signs of autonomy satisfaction:
88	- meaningful choices, not fake choices
89	- multiple valid paths or priorities
90	- flexible pacing or self-directed goals
91	- player expression of preference or playstyle
92	- guidance that supports choice rather than replacing it
93	- actions that feel intentional and consequential
94	- constraints that are understandable rather than arbitrary
95
96	Signs of autonomy denial:
97	- overly forced funnels
98	- constant interruption or coercion
99	- fake choice with one obviously correct option
100	- rigid pacing with little ownership
101	- recommendation systems that feel bossy
102	- decisions that do not materially matter
103	- excessive timers or blockers with no agency-preserving response
104
105	Ask:
106	- What meaningful choices does the player make?
107	- Can the player set their own short-term priorities?
108	- Does guidance preserve agency or replace it?
109	- Are there multiple viable ways to progress?
110	- Does the player feel ownership over success?
111	- Where does the system make the player feel trapped, railroaded, or manipulated?
112
113	Use this format:
114
115	\| Autonomy Dimension \| Evidence of Satisfaction \| Evidence of Denial \| Severity \|
116	\|---\|---\|---\|---\|
117
118	### 4. Audit competence
119
120	Ask whether the design helps the player feel effective, improving, and capable.
121
122	Signs of competence satisfaction:
123	- clear goals and immediate feedback
124	- understandable cause and effect
125	- actions produce v

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit

34stars3forks

View on GitHub

How to install game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit?

stanestane/game-design-skills-bundle/game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit

$npx -y skills add Stanestane/game-design-skills-bundle --skill game-design-player-need-satisfaction-audit

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Game Design Player Need Satisfaction Audit
2
3	Audit a design by asking whether it satisfies core psychological needs rather than merely driving activity.
4
5	Use this skill to examine whether a game, feature, or live-ops system supports autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and where it may be denying those needs instead. Keep the analysis practical and design-facing. Treat fun as need satisfaction rather than as a vague entertainment label.
6
7	## Core principle
8
9	People do not play games only because they are interactive or rewarding. They play because games satisfy core psychological needs. A feature can have solid metrics, clean progression, and monetization hooks, yet still feel emotionally weak if it fails to satisfy these needs.
10
11	## Need lenses
12
13	### 1. Autonomy
14	The need to feel like a causal agent of one's own actions.
15
16	In game terms: meaningful choice, ownership, self-directed action, strategic freedom, and perceived control.
17
18	### 2. Competence
19	The need to feel effective, capable, and progressively more skillful.
20
21	In game terms: clear goals, understandable feedback, mastery, successful execution, improvement, and meaningful progress.
22
23	### 3. Relatedness
24	The need to feel socially connected, embedded, recognized, compared, valued, or bonded with others.
25
26	In game terms: cooperation, rivalry, status visibility, shared progress, belonging, social ritual, and social meaning.
27
28	### 4. Benevolence (optional)
29	Use this supplementary lens when the design includes helping, gifting, nurturing, stewardship, caretaking, or contribution to others.
30
31	## What to produce
32
33	Generate an audit with these outputs:
34
35	1. Need satisfaction profile - how strongly the design satisfies autonomy, competence, and relatedness
36	2. Need denial profile - where the design frustrates or blocks those needs
37	3. Mechanism map - which systems create or reduce satisfaction
38	4. Risk diagnosis - where the design is emotionally hollow, coercive, or overly one-dimensional
39	5. Improvement recommendations - targeted design changes to improve need satisfaction
40
41	## Process
42
43	### 1. Define the audit target
44
45	Clarify exactly what is being audited.
46
47	Possible targets:
48	- full game
49	- core loop
50	- new feature
51	- onboarding
52	- event structure
53	- social system
54	- monetization flow
55	- return loop
56	- session opener
57
58	Write:
59	- Audit target
60	- Player context
61	- Why this audit matters
62
63	### 2. Map intended player experience
64
65	Describe what the design is supposed to make the player feel and do.
66
67	This step prevents theory from floating free of the actual experience.
68
69	Ask:
70	- What is the intended player fantasy?
71	- What actions define the loop?
72	- What are players choosing?
73	- What are they trying to master?
74	- Where are they encountering other people, directly or indirectly?
75	- What does success look like from the player's perspective?
76
77	Write:
78	- Intended player experience
79	- Core actions
80	- Sources of progress
81	- Sources of social meaning
82
83	### 3. Audit autonomy
84
85	Ask whether the design helps the player feel like an active agent rather than a passenger.
86
87	Signs of autonomy satisfaction:
88	- meaningful choices, not fake choices
89	- multiple valid paths or priorities
90	- flexible pacing or self-directed goals
91	- player expression of preference or playstyle
92	- guidance that supports choice rather than replacing it
93	- actions that feel intentional and consequential
94	- constraints that are understandable rather than arbitrary
95
96	Signs of autonomy denial:
97	- overly forced funnels
98	- constant interruption or coercion
99	- fake choice with one obviously correct option
100	- rigid pacing with little ownership
101	- recommendation systems that feel bossy
102	- decisions that do not materially matter
103	- excessive timers or blockers with no agency-preserving response
104
105	Ask:
106	- What meaningful choices does the player make?
107	- Can the player set their own short-term priorities?
108	- Does guidance preserve agency or replace it?
109	- Are there multiple viable ways to progress?
110	- Does the player feel ownership over success?
111	- Where does the system make the player feel trapped, railroaded, or manipulated?
112
113	Use this format:
114
115	\| Autonomy Dimension \| Evidence of Satisfaction \| Evidence of Denial \| Severity \|
116	\|---\|---\|---\|---\|
117
118	### 4. Audit competence
119
120	Ask whether the design helps the player feel effective, improving, and capable.
121
122	Signs of competence satisfaction:
123	- clear goals and immediate feedback
124	- understandable cause and effect
125	- actions produce v

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type