version: 1.1
Part 1 of my Mechanical Needs and Connections Theory.

NOTE: This blog will be getting a rework! Follow for more news on the rework

Quick Recap: We interpret meaning from everything in our world through interaction.
Our past knowledge helps interpret and recognize connected elements within the world and games.
Game design can be defined once we understand that we are tailoring the interpretation of mechanics .
Many theories cover that mechanics elicit experiences but not how they do.
I frame the elements that provide interpretation as Unknown or Known Connections and Needs that can be bound to the Game or Player.

Thank you to:
John Sangster and Cyril Focht for reading this over before 1.0

My aim of this theory is to provide a framework and paradigm for understanding and designing expressive mechanics. A framework I'm calling the Expressive Mechanics By Connections framework.

But let's break down what we need to understand to reach that point.

Agenda:

1. I review some limitations in popular theories covering how game mechanics express meaning.
   
2. I present how we interpret meaning from everything in the world.
3. I utilize the framing to understand games through Needs and Connections.

1. The limitations in popular design theories

There's numerous theories and frameworks for how games express  meaning to players. I will cover my thoughts on many but here's a look at 2 influential ones. I'll include what I believe limits the theories that my framework will build on.

The Mechanics Dynamics Aesthetics (MDA) framework sets a simple and resonating framework. Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc and Robert Zubek present that the Mechanics of a game create Dynamics of mechanical interactions which evoke player's Aesthetics of fun. This framework would provide a tool for identifying player experiences to types of fun.  Sensation, Fantasy, Narrative, Challenge, Fellowship, Discovery, Expression, Submission are the types of player aesthetics.  [All material from 1>]

I respect the work put in the MDA framework to attempt to capture what games can express yet I believe this framework currently stands as a limited target for player experience. Absolutely, mechanics create dynamics that impact the player but why do these mechanics impact the player like so? I aim to answer this question.

Raph Koster wrote that "Games are just exceptionally tasty patterns to eat up" and "with games, learning is the drug"  in "A Theory of Fun for Game Design" . Those 2 core ideas have stuck out to me for how they approach games from a psychological approach.  [All material from 2,3>]

I believe Koster highlighted the presence of patterns and learning in games well, yet, I believe there's more to be explored about them. Patterns can give a grander explanation to games that I will explore further. Also, there seems to be more to games than just "fun". This gets us closer to answering the question, however, we're going to need to break down behavior into a more digestible state.

So, we interpret meaning from mechanics but still need to understand how.  Let's see how we interpret things that aren't mechanics.

2. The meaning from interacting with the world around us

We interpret meaning from everything around us. Before thinking about how a player interprets and interacts with a game, let's think about how an individual interprets and interacts with a chair.

and a rock.

A rock by itself is just some physical thing in our world bound by physical rules and is connected to countless other physical components. What physical rules do you think define a rock? We currently understand that there's countless atoms which connect together in a tight packed structure to keep this whole thing together. The tight atom structure makes it coarse and ragged. I think this almost definitely tastes terrible.

Now these are physical properties of the rock but did you notice my sensory interactions with the rock? I touched the rock and felt it was jagged because I have the capacity to feel it and interpret this. I need my eyes to interact with light to see the rock. And my tongue, without my tongue I couldn't be able to taste this rock but did I really taste it? With my previous knowledge, I was able to deduce and make the connection that tasting the rock would be pretty bad.

Now repeat what I did but, for a chair instead. The physical connections within the chair give a comfortable texture. A designer manipulated this chair to make the physical connected elements provide a user comfort and perhaps changed the color so my eyes would perceive a color I found relaxing. So, what makes these world interactions happen?

There's the physical connections bound to things in the world (Atoms make an object smooth). There's the connections bound to a person between the physical connections and human's past experiences/perceptions (smooth things are pleasant). Finally, there's the designer who made a decision to make those connections in an object for expression (Potter smooths out edges of fine pot that is pleasant to use).

This is how we can see game mechanics. A game is created by a designer to express some meaning to the player. Like with a chair designer, that meaning can serve several functions.

So, how do I frame these connections in games?

3. The Needs and Connections Framework

A black cat means bad luck or a painting means comfort to us.
We can express meaning to others through art, food and more.
However, I want to explore how we can design mechanics to express such meaning.
Because just like the architect’s choice of color and the chef’s choice of cutting,
The game designer’s choice in the rules and systems can speak volumes.

Meaning: What we get from art

It's not about the game. It's about the experience players interpret from them. Always think about how a player should feel from something in your game.  

This is why "game design" in of itself in my opinion provides a misleading image. We are making games but we need to think of how the art, mechanics and music express meaning to the player. 

But to be honest, I began this blog because I realized my fascination with mechanics. Just like a forced brush stroke can express, the causes and effects of systems can tell stories. Games are fun by teaching us and I'll explore different existing theories on game design to showcase how we can use mechanics to express. The Meaning to me is the emotional, intellectual and physical message of a game. 

Games are not about being fun. They are about using our mental connections and systems to express some engaging learning experience.

Through interaction, we interpret meaning from the world around us. Where one may see comfort in a rock, others connect the rock surface to discomfort in their mind. What is this Meaning built from? I believe it is built from Connections and Needs. These 2 factors can be Game Bound and Player Bound. 
Below is a figure for what fuels what. (The flowchart was made with Notion's Mermaid flowchart functionality in it's code block. A useful tool for game designers to visualize small systems in games. More on that here)

Game Bound Connections fuel Player Bound Connections and Game Bound Needs.
Then Player Connections and Game Bound Needs fuel Player Bound Needs. 

Let's explore Connections and Needs.

Connections: What we recognize to create Meaning

How we connect the elements in a game and our mind help shape patterns of thinking

Game Bound Connections refer to the connection between mechanics in the game. A failstate attached to the amount of blood left in a a game's entities is an actual connection in the systems. Or, a key able to interact with a door.

Player Bound Connections refer to the connection between the mechanics/Game Bound Connections and player mental concepts. A user might utilize the connection of superstitions and dread to interpret that a black cat is unlucky whereas another has the connection of comfort from a black cat. These connections dictate how they interpret meaning from a Piece.

Imagine a game where all characters walk on the floor. Then there’s a character that can walk on walls only. There’s many connections we can interpret from this special character. The Game Bound Connections show the disparity of access of walls with this special character and definitely odd behavior. Then, a game can build Player Bound Connections where this type of movement is related to monsters in this world and you store this understanding to caution characters that break the traditional movement. 

Game Bound Connections are like the physical connections within a rock to give it it's texture and shape. Player Bound Connections define how a person connects the physical properties of the rock to their experience and thinking.

Needs: What utilize Connections

A Designer’s game has something the player needs to get out of it. Needs formed by the conditions in a game and these conditions in the game justify/create patterns of thinking

Game Bound Needs refer to the actual conditions in a game, often that use Game Bound Connections. The need to remove at least 50% of blood from a game entity to make it reach a failstate. The need for a key to unlock a door.

Player Bound Needs refer to what a user must understand to overcome, often that use Player Bound Connections AND Game Bound Needs. The need for the player to understand to stay away from away black cats that appear due to the mechanical rise in bad luck around them. Or, the need for the player to embrace cats because there ISN'T a mechanical rise to bad luck despite a popular conflicting Player Bound Connection of superstition. These will be thoroughly explored throughout this theory series.

Game Bound Needs illustrate the rules of a rock like how it will fall to gravity or can't change shape easily. The Player Bound Needs rise from the Player Bound Connections and Game Bound Needs. A person uses the connection of comfort and stability from rocks with the not shape changing nature of the rock to see a need to use it to sit on and rest.

Unknown and Known: What progresses change

I will cover change throughout the theory series but through our experiences, Needs and Connections shift from Unknown to Known and can change radically player experience. The horrid taste of rocks shifted from Unknown to Known and changed our experience in the world.

Absent and Present: The impact of what is and isn't in the world

This blog will cover how to understand expressive game mechanics and it's causes. It's going to be crucial to understand the lack of mechanics has immense effects. My theory intends to cover how mechanics of all types of games affects players and this can include incredibly system dependent simulations to short narrative visual novels. So the amount of mechanics in a game do not change the value of a game, they change what the game does to the player.

Powerful adjectives I will utilize in this series include the Unknown and Known as well as Absent and Present. Unknown and Known will demonstrate how a player's knowledge will change and influence their experience. Absent and Present will demonstrate how what is and isn't in a game influence our experience. This gives us the tools to understand powerful experiences in any game.

So how do we use these?

Seriously, think about it. How do we feel emotions from numbers going up and down. Why do we feel tension within the patterns of a game?
And how do we replicate this effectively?

Join me in answering these questions. Now that we understand what we are designing, we need to understand how Users interpret from patterns and connections. So we can understand how to design rather than imply.

Using these core elements of my Mechanical Needs and Connections Theory:

• Needs and Connections
• Which can be Game or Player Bound
• Unknown or Known to the Player
• Absent or Present in the Game.

These affect the Player patterns of thinking which affect their experience and interpretation of meaning

Find the next article here! https://itch.io/blog/510118/essential-outside-factors-of-games

Here's a link to the blog's table of contents
Thank you and it was an honor to write this.

Changelog:
0.9 February 26 2023 - Was quite a mess and I wanted to deflect myself from any ideas that making games is all about trying to make difficult to solve systems that are superior to any "non mechanic focused" games. But for 1.0 I decided to refocus on what I cared about. Designing. Expressive. Mechanics. So I realized I needed to first explain the importance of design and once that was cleared the runaway was away for creativity in game mechanics. This was also helped with feedback from John Sangster and Cyril Focht to be more clear and expand.
1.0 February 27 2023 - Mention Absence and Presence which I will build on to in later articles but want to set up that games don't have to be systems drowned. Also changed meaning to part to really amplify how meaning is interpretive which was quite a focus in 0.9
References:
>John Sangster
(Twitter, itch.io)
>Cyril Focht
(Twitter, Personal)
1>"MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research" by Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, Robert Zubek
2>"A Theory of Fun for Game Design" by Raph Koster
3>https://game-studies.fandom.com/wiki/A_Theory_of_Fun_for_Game_Design