Betrayal

Summary: Failing to uphold a clear or unspoken agreement with players or users.

Pattern Description

Betrayal consists of the failure to uphold a clear or unspoken agreement with users or players. Games can usually put players in situations in which these agreements are to be forcibly broken or they simply create favourable conditions for them to be broken, either by explicit or implicit rules and mechanics. Betrayal may be driven by individual gain, hidden loyalties, player position, revenge, or forced alliances. There is a potential risk of losing trust when using betrayal. Breaking promises or expectations of these interactors may impact trust between each other, and with the game or computational system. There may be an overlap between betrayal and breaking users, players or interactors’ legitimate expectations and/or particular social norms, either established within the system or the gameworld.

Interaction Design Implications

There is the potential risk of users losing trust in the system when this pattern is in play. Breaking promises or expectations of these interactors may impact trust between each other, and with the game or computational system. The use of this pattern may violate several interaction design heuristics, such as Visibility of system status (Nielsen) and Keep users in control (Shneiderman), since breaking users’ expectations may undermine their sense of control and trust in the system.

Usage

Usage to be determined

Examples

• Baldur’s Gate 3 (2023): This game fosters inherent mistrust between the player and NPCs, driven by narrative. Many NPCs have hidden agendas, often leading to dishonesty or offers that betray others. This suspicion encourages players to uncover secrets, resulting in narratively rich side-tracks and alternative events, enhancing the game’s emergent environment.But in this game betrayal involves both player and NPC actions. Players may betray NPCs by contradicting dialogue, while NPCs may lie. Ensemble characters can become enemies or require actions against the player’s interest, leading to potential betrayal or self-sacrifice. Excluding them from quests also causes hostility. Betrayal is a recurring theme in this game, stemming from the game’s central focus on distrusting NPCs during interactions.

• League of Legends (2009): In this game, betrayal contradicts its spirit, and it is hard to imagine a betrayal in a game with such limited freedom in player actions. However, poor gameplay, intentionally aiding opponents, underperformance, or early departure could be seen as betrayal. It’s difficult to see mistrust as a core mechanic in MOBAs. For example, intentionally helping the opposing team or letting your guard down to allow them to score points could be considered betrayal. This would lead to distrust among your teammates.

• DayZ (2013): DayZ’s narrative fosters mistrust and betrayal, as players expect hostility due to its post-apocalyptic setting, unpredictable players, and scarce resources. The game’s open-world design, with minimal admin interference, emphasises unmediated social interaction. This allows players to build trust and communicate, enhancing the tense social experience. Uncertainty and relinquishing control define DayZ. Players face unpredictable intentions from others. Communication relies on cautious voice chat, highlighting the pervasive uncertainty and lack of social sanctions within the game.

Metadata & Relations

  PAGE STATUS: Reviewed