In a significant move towards greater precision within game design discourse, game designer Keith Burgun has put forth a comprehensive proposal to retire the ubiquitous and often misunderstood term "randomness." Citing its overloaded nature and the difficulty it poses for clear, non-judgmental discussion about game mechanics, Burgun advocates for a new lexicon comprising specific terms tailored to different types of variance and player experiences. This initiative seeks to provide developers, critics, and players alike with a more nuanced vocabulary to articulate the intricate workings of interactive entertainment, moving beyond a single, often negatively connoted, catch-all phrase.
The genesis of this proposal stems from a long-standing challenge in game development: how to discuss unpredictable elements without implying inherent flaws or a lack of skill-based gameplay. Burgun, known for his analytical approach to game design and his advocacy for "good randomness" in previous articles, identifies his personal enjoyment of "Hearthstone: Battlegrounds" — an autobattler within the Hearthstone app, which he describes as "highly, highly random" by conventional definitions — as a practical example of why the existing terminology falls short. His latest effort is less a critique of specific games and more a foundational step towards fostering richer, more accurate conversations about how chance and uncertainty are integrated into gameplay.
The Evolution and Limitations of "Randomness" in Gaming
The concept of "randomness" has been an intrinsic part of games since their earliest forms, from the roll of dice in ancient board games to the shuffle of cards in poker. In the realm of video games, it has manifested in countless ways: critical hit chances in role-playing games, item drops in loot-based titles, procedural generation in roguelikes, and even the unpredictable behavior of artificial intelligence. For decades, "randomness" served as a convenient shorthand for any outcome not entirely determined by player input or deterministic rules.
However, as games have grown in complexity and sophistication, and as the industry has matured, the limitations of this singular term have become increasingly apparent. "Randomness" often carries a pejorative connotation, frequently equated with "luck-based" or "unfair" gameplay, which can undermine the perceived skill ceiling of a game. This broad usage obscures the deliberate design choices behind various unpredictable elements, making it challenging for designers to communicate their intentions, for critics to offer precise analysis, and for players to understand the underlying systems. A game designer might implement an unpredictable element to enhance replayability, create dramatic tension, or simulate chaotic environments, yet all these distinct motivations are lumped under the same "randomness" umbrella, often leading to misinterpretations and heated debates within player communities. The absence of a precise vocabulary inhibits effective problem-solving and innovation in design, as it fails to distinguish between different mechanisms that produce varied player experiences.
A Refined Lexicon: Deconstructing Unpredictability
Burgun’s proposal introduces several distinct terms, each designed to capture a specific facet of what was previously broadly categorized as "randomness." These terms aim to provide a more analytical framework, allowing for clearer differentiation between mechanism, experience, and impact.
Unpredictable: The Foundational Replacement
The blanket term "Unpredictable" is positioned as the primary replacement for "randomness." It encompasses any game mechanism where the player cannot deterministically foresee the outcome. This definition is deliberately neutral, focusing solely on the inability to predict rather than implying any positive or negative value. Examples range from the draw of a card from a shuffled deck in games like Magic: The Gathering or Hearthstone, to damage ranges in RPGs (e.g., dealing 5-10 damage), or even the success rate of a complex input in a fighting game (like executing a "Dragon Punch"). Burgun also extends this to simultaneous actions, where players’ choices interact in ways that cannot be fully predicted beforehand, as seen in real-time strategy games or simultaneous-reveal mechanics. By using "unpredictable," discussions can focus on how an outcome is unpredictable, rather than simply labeling it as "random," which often stifles further analysis. This term establishes a baseline for all subsequent, more specific descriptors.
Chaotic: The Experiential Descriptor
"Chaotic" is proposed as an experiential descriptor, characterizing the feeling of a game where numerous unpredictable effects occur with such frequency and intensity that players struggle to grasp or stabilize the game state. Unlike "unpredictable," which describes a mechanism, "chaotic" describes the player’s perception and the game’s aesthetic. Burgun clarifies that a game being chaotic is not inherently good or bad; it depends on the designer’s intent. Games aiming to evoke the visceral sensation of a battle, for instance, often benefit from a degree of chaos to prevent them from feeling like sterile puzzles. Consider the frantic, overwhelming nature of a "bullet hell" shooter or the large-scale, unpredictable skirmishes in a massive multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) or a sandbox war game like Planetside 2. The chaotic nature contributes to immersion and excitement, preventing a purely deterministic experience that might feel less dynamic.
Volatile: Quantifying Impact
"Volatile" describes unpredictable mechanisms that carry a high impact on the game state. This term shifts the focus from the probability or frequency of an event to its consequence. A damage range of "6-10 damage" is far less volatile than "0-100 damage," even if both are unpredictable. Volatility can manifest in critical hit multipliers, rare item drops with game-altering effects, or abilities that have a wide spectrum of potential outcomes. For instance, a spell that either does minimal damage or instantly defeats an opponent is highly volatile. Designers strategically use volatility to introduce tension, create dramatic swings, and emphasize high-risk, high-reward decision-making. In competitive games, understanding and managing volatility is a key skill, as players must weigh the potential gains against the catastrophic losses associated with certain unpredictable events.
Erratic: Unpredictability of Predictability Itself
"Erratic" refers to a system where the level of predictability itself fluctuates in an unpredictable manner. This is a more subtle form of variance, where a game might predominantly feel deterministic and controlled, only to suddenly introduce a highly unpredictable element that drastically alters the established flow. Burgun admits that specific examples for this are less common but postulates its existence, suggesting scenarios like a mini-game that abruptly flips the entire board or introduces entirely new, volatile mechanics. An AI opponent that typically follows predictable patterns but occasionally diverges into wild, unforeseen strategies could also be described as erratic. The psychological impact of erratic systems can be profound, ranging from exhilarating surprise to frustrating disorientation, challenging players to adapt to constantly shifting expectations.
Luck-Based / Unfair: The Emotional and Social Dimensions
These terms delve into the emotional and social experience of playing a game with high-variance unpredictable events. "Luck-based" typically applies to single-player experiences where the player feels their success is primarily determined by favorable or unfavorable outcomes beyond their control, rather than their skill. This perception can lead to frustration or a diminished sense of accomplishment. "Unfair," conversely, is more often used in multiplayer contexts, reflecting the perception that unpredictable elements disproportionately favor one player over another, compromising the integrity of competition. When players feel that a loss was due to "bad luck" or an "unfair" turn of events, rather than superior opponent skill or their own mistakes, it can lead to negative sentiment and disengagement. These terms highlight the crucial distinction between a game having unpredictable elements and players perceiving those elements as undermining their agency or the game’s balance.
"Slot Machine": The Extreme End of Minimal Agency
The term "Slot Machine" describes a game or system where the skill ceiling is extremely close to, or identical with, the skill floor. In such systems, player input and decision-making have negligible impact on outcomes, which are almost entirely determined by unpredictable chance. A pure coin flip is the quintessential "slot machine" mechanic. While rarely the sole mechanic in sophisticated video games, this concept is particularly relevant in mobile gaming, where "gacha" mechanics and other forms of monetized gambling-like systems have become prevalent. These systems are often criticized for exploiting psychological vulnerabilities and for lacking meaningful gameplay, reducing player interaction to little more than pulling a lever and hoping for a favorable outcome. This term serves as a critical descriptor for mechanics that prioritize pure chance over player agency and strategic depth.
Implications for Game Design, Criticism, and Player Experience
Adopting this refined lexicon holds profound implications across the entire gaming ecosystem.
For Game Designers: A more precise vocabulary enables designers to articulate their intentions with greater clarity. Instead of simply stating "this game has randomness," they can specify, "this game incorporates a degree of volatility in its combat system to ensure dramatic moments," or "the procedural generation aims for a chaotic environment to enhance replayability." This clarity fosters better internal communication within development teams, leading to more coherent design decisions and a clearer vision for the player experience. It also allows for more targeted iteration during testing, as designers can identify whether a particular unpredictable element is creating the desired chaotic feel, or if its volatility is proving unfair.
For Game Critics and Journalists: The new terms provide sharper tools for analysis. Reviews can move beyond simplistic labels like "too random" or "not enough randomness" to offer nuanced insights into how specific types of unpredictability contribute to or detract from a game’s design goals. A critic could analyze how a game’s erratic shifts in difficulty create a unique sense of tension, or how its volatile loot system shapes player progression. This elevates the standard of game criticism, allowing for more insightful and constructive feedback.
For Players and the Community: While academic and professional terms can sometimes be slow to disseminate to the general player base, a clearer discourse eventually benefits players. Understanding the specific nature of an unpredictable element can help players appreciate design choices, distinguish between perceived "luck" and actual strategic depth, and engage in more productive discussions about game balance. For instance, players might learn to differentiate between a genuinely unfair mechanic and a volatile one that simply requires different risk management strategies. This can reduce frustration and foster a deeper understanding of game mechanics.
Broader Industry Context and the Future of Game Language
Burgun’s proposal is not an isolated effort. There is a growing movement within game design academia and professional circles to formalize the language used to describe interactive systems. Concepts like ludology and narratology have long sought to establish rigorous frameworks for game analysis. As games become more complex, incorporating elements of psychology, economics, and social interaction, the need for a precise, shared vocabulary becomes paramount.
While the immediate adoption of these terms by the entire industry might be gradual, the very act of proposing them initiates a critical conversation. Academic researchers could integrate these terms into studies on player psychology, engagement, and game balance. Game design courses could teach this lexicon, equipping the next generation of developers with more sophisticated tools. The challenge lies in popularizing these terms beyond a niche group, making them accessible and useful for the broader community.
Ultimately, Keith Burgun’s proposal to move beyond the ambiguous "randomness" is a significant step towards maturing the discourse surrounding game design. By providing a more precise and comprehensive set of terms – Unpredictable, Chaotic, Volatile, Erratic, Luck-Based/Unfair, and "Slot Machine" – he offers a framework that can enrich communication, refine design practices, and foster a deeper appreciation for the intricate art and science of creating interactive experiences. In an era where games are increasingly recognized as a powerful cultural and economic force, the language we use to discuss them must evolve to match their growing complexity and significance.
About the Author
