San Francisco, CA – In a candid and insightful presentation at the GDC Festival of Gaming on March 10, 2026, AdHoc Studio’s creative directors and co-founders, Nick Herman and Dennis Lenard, pulled back the curtain on the subtle "lies" their superhero workplace comedy, Dispatch, tells its players. The episodic title, lauded for its unique blend of strategic decision-making and character-driven narrative, utilizes sophisticated, yet largely invisible, Random Number Generation (RNG) mechanics designed not to deceive, but to enhance player engagement and ensure a smoother, more satisfying experience. This transparency from the developers sparked considerable discussion among attendees, highlighting the ongoing industry debate about balancing player agency with narrative flow and accessibility.
The GDC Festival of Gaming: A Platform for Candid Insights
The GDC Festival of Gaming, a prominent fixture in the global game development calendar, is renowned for fostering an environment of open exchange and technical deep dives. Held annually in conjunction with the larger Game Developers Conference, it serves as a crucial forum for developers to share cutting-edge techniques, design philosophies, and often, the unvarnished realities of game production. AdHoc Studio’s session, titled "The Art of Deception: Crafting Fair RNG in Dispatch," was a standout, drawing a substantial audience eager to understand the intricacies of player-facing mechanics. The studio, which has garnered a reputation for its innovative approach to interactive storytelling in previous ventures, demonstrated a willingness to dissect their design choices, offering valuable lessons for the broader development community. Herman and Lenard, both veterans of the narrative gaming space, articulated their belief that player experience, particularly in story-rich games, sometimes necessitates a gentle nudge from the system.
Deconstructing the ‘Dispatch’ Gameplay Loop and Initial Design
Dispatch places players in the shoes of a central coordinator, tasked with directing a team of endearingly dysfunctional superheroes through a series of city-threatening crises. The core gameplay revolves around strategic dispatching: players must assess a given crisis, evaluate the unique abilities and weaknesses of their available heroes, and assign the most suitable candidate for the job. The game then provides a percentile readout, indicating the likelihood of success for the chosen hero and action. For instance, a hero might have an 85 percent chance of successfully defusing a bomb, while another, less suited, might only register a 15 percent chance. This visible probability system forms the bedrock of player decision-making.
Lenard elaborated on the evolution of this core mechanic, revealing that the initial design concepts for Dispatch were far more rigid. "The initial design scenarios had invisible pass-fail thresholds where players would have to guess what the stat requirements might be," Lenard explained during the presentation. This binary system, he noted, quickly proved problematic in early internal testing. Players often felt arbitrarily punished or rewarded, lacking a clear understanding of why their choices succeeded or failed. This led to frustration and a sense of detachment from the strategic elements. The team recognized that for a game centered on character and narrative, such opacity could be detrimental. Consequently, they transitioned to a chance-driven system, believing that visible probabilities, even if influenced by unseen factors, would foster a greater sense of player agency and fairness.
The Philosophy Behind Perceived Fairness: RNG as an Equalizer
The shift to a chance-driven system wasn’t merely about transparency; it was about leveraging RNG as an "equalizer" across different player demographics. Lenard highlighted how this design choice broadened the game’s appeal. "For casual players, that means as long as you send someone—even if they’re a bad choice—you’re going to have even the smallest chance of succeeding," he stated. This philosophy ensures that players new to strategic games or those simply looking to enjoy the narrative aren’t immediately stymied by insurmountable odds. It lowers the barrier to entry, inviting a wider audience to experience Dispatch‘s unique charm.
Conversely, for more experienced gamers—often referred to as "min-maxers" who meticulously optimize their choices—the probabilistic system offered a different kind of engagement. "For more experienced gamers, it was an opportunity to min-max and send the perfect team without over or under committing your resources," Lenard added. These players could delve into the nuances of hero stats, mission requirements, and the displayed percentages to make highly calculated decisions, striving for optimal outcomes and resource management. This dual approach ensured that Dispatch remained accessible without sacrificing strategic depth, a delicate balance many developers strive for but few fully achieve. The visible percentages provided the illusion of complete control, even as subtle mechanisms worked behind the scenes to smooth out potential rough edges.
The "Invisible Hand" of RNG: Mitigating Player Frustration
The most groundbreaking revelations centered on AdHoc Studio’s methods for mitigating the inherent frustrations often associated with RNG, especially the notorious "bad luck" streaks that can derail player enjoyment. Herman openly accepted that RNG can be a divisive mechanic, particularly in story-driven titles where progression is paramount. A hard fail scenario that repeatedly halts players in their tracks would, he argued, detract significantly from Dispatch‘s narrative flow and player immersion. The goal was to ensure that players felt challenged but rarely unfairly penalized.
The inspiration for their solution came from an unlikely, yet widely respected, source: Firaxis Games’ XCOM series, renowned for its challenging, probability-driven combat. "As any hardcore XCOM player knows, one of the tricks Firaxis implemented was to secretly boost the numbers behind the scenes so that it felt fair even if it was unearned," Herman explained, referencing the "aim assist" or "RNG seeding" often suspected or confirmed in such games. "Those guys are pretty smart so we thought we’d do the same."
AdHoc Studio implemented a multi-layered system of hidden adjustments:
- Guaranteed Success Threshold: After extensive user testing, the team discovered a critical psychological threshold. "Anything that had over a 76 percent success rate would automatically succeed," Herman revealed. This meant that if the game displayed a 77% or higher chance of success, the action would always resolve positively, regardless of the underlying random roll. This invisible safety net was crucial for player confidence, preventing the demoralizing experience of failing a highly probable action.
- The Three-Strike Buffer: To prevent this auto-win from becoming too predictable or making the game feel too easy, a clever counter-measure was introduced. "After the player benefited three times from this boost, we would remove the auto-win and give them true odds again," Herman detailed. This temporary lifting of the safety net reintroduced genuine uncertainty, reminding players that risks still existed.
- Re-enabling the Safety Net: Critically, the system was designed to be forgiving. "As soon as they failed above 76 percent, we enabled the three auto-wins again to guarantee they didn’t have a string of bad luck and complain the game wasn’t fair," Herman clarified. This immediate re-activation after a high-percentage failure was a masterstroke in player psychology, preventing prolonged frustration and maintaining a sense of the system "looking out" for the player.
- Minimum Success Chance: In addition to these high-percentage adjustments, Lenard revealed another hidden floor: "Any percentage between 1 percent and 14 percent was bumped up to a flat 15 percent chance of success." This ensured that even the most ill-advised hero choices still carried a tangible, albeit small, possibility of success. This mechanism catered directly to the casual player demographic, ensuring that even a desperate, last-ditch effort wasn’t entirely futile, fostering a persistent glimmer of hope.
These sophisticated, invisible mechanisms underscore a growing trend in game design: prioritizing the perception of fairness and player agency over strict, unadulterated randomness. Industry surveys frequently indicate that player retention and satisfaction are profoundly impacted by feelings of control and equitable challenge. When players feel consistently unlucky or that the game is "cheating" them, engagement plummets. AdHoc Studio’s approach directly addresses these psychological factors, subtly guiding players towards a more enjoyable narrative journey without stripping away the core strategic elements.
User Testing and Player Perception: Validation of ‘Invisible Helpers’
The efficacy of these "invisible helpers" was rigorously tested with real players. The feedback, according to AdHoc Studio, was overwhelmingly positive. Players consistently reported that Dispatch felt fair, even if some occasionally perceived it as "a touch easy at times." This validation was critical, confirming that the hidden adjustments achieved their intended purpose: creating a balanced experience where frustration was minimized, and player engagement remained high. The fact that players noted the game sometimes felt easy, rather than rigged or unfair, speaks volumes about the subtlety and effectiveness of AdHoc’s design. It suggests that the system successfully walked the fine line between offering genuine challenge and preventing demoralizing setbacks, allowing the narrative and character development to shine through.
The Grand Finale: Removing the Training Wheels
Perhaps the most impactful design decision, and another testament to AdHoc Studio’s narrative-first approach, involved the deliberate removal of all these hidden safeguards during the game’s climactic final act. "The final change we made was in the last episode. With things on fire and your dispatching skills being put to the test, we disabled all of these invisible helpers," Lenard disclosed. "For the first time in the entire season the training wheels are off, and as a result the game feels a lot harder—which is exactly what we wanted for our finale."
This strategic shift dramatically altered the player experience for the endgame. After an entire season of subtly guided probabilities, players were suddenly confronted with true, unmitigated RNG. This created a heightened sense of stakes and genuine peril, perfectly aligning with the narrative’s escalation towards a final, desperate confrontation. The sudden increase in difficulty, far from being frustrating, served to underscore the gravity of the situation, making player decisions feel more impactful and the eventual outcome more earned. It leveraged the player’s established comfort with the "fair" system to create a powerful contrast, demonstrating a masterful understanding of pacing and emotional resonance in interactive storytelling. This deliberate design choice transformed a potential source of frustration into a powerful narrative tool, making the finale feel truly epic and challenging.
Broader Implications for Game Design and Player Trust
AdHoc Studio’s transparent disclosure at the GDC Festival of Gaming has significant implications for the broader game development community and the ongoing discourse surrounding player trust and design transparency. The practice of dynamically adjusting game mechanics behind the scenes is not new; concepts like "rubber-banding" in racing games (where AI opponents speed up or slow down to keep the player competitive) or dynamic difficulty adjustments in action games have been around for decades. However, the explicit and detailed revelation of such intricate RNG manipulation in a narrative-focused game like Dispatch brings the conversation to the forefront.
One key implication is the re-evaluation of "fairness" in game design. Is a game truly fair if its stated probabilities are secretly altered? AdHoc’s argument, bolstered by player feedback, suggests that perceived fairness, which translates to a more enjoyable and less frustrating experience, can be more valuable than absolute statistical purity, especially when the goal is narrative engagement rather than pure competitive balance. This perspective challenges purists who advocate for absolute transparency in mechanics, prompting a discussion about the ultimate purpose of game design: is it to simulate reality perfectly, or to craft an engaging, emotionally resonant experience?
Moreover, this discussion touches upon the ethical considerations of "lying" to players, even with good intentions. While AdHoc’s approach seems to have been well-received, it opens the door to potential misuse by other developers. The line between enhancing experience and manipulative design can be thin. Herman and Lenard’s candidness, however, provides a valuable framework for how such techniques can be employed responsibly and disclosed transparently, fostering trust rather than eroding it. Their decision to openly share these "trade secrets" at a major industry event signals a mature approach to game development, prioritizing player experience while respecting the intelligence of the development community.
Looking ahead, such sophisticated, adaptive RNG systems may become more commonplace, particularly in games where narrative progression, accessibility, and player retention are critical. As player expectations evolve and the market diversifies, developers are continually seeking innovative ways to cater to a wider audience without compromising artistic vision. AdHoc Studio’s Dispatch serves as a compelling case study, demonstrating that sometimes, a little well-intentioned deception can lead to a genuinely better game. The dialogue initiated by Herman and Lenard at GDC Festival of Gaming is likely to resonate for years to come, influencing how developers approach the intricate dance between randomness, player agency, and the elusive goal of perfect player experience.
Game Developer and GDC Festival of Gaming are sibling companies under Informa Festivals.
About the Author
