This property stores the interaction design implications of a friction pattern.
Text schema:adverseOutcome (schema | Schema.org, V 28.0)
B
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. +
Encountering the Blatant Lie pattern initiates a range of player emotions. Initially, players may experience a heightened sense of urgency or anxiety. The revelation can evoke surprise, amusement, or relief, challenging player assumptions and fostering a deeper understanding of the game's true mechanics. +
C
Checkpoint Starvation lowers user control and predictability, as they cannot save the progress at will. The pattern also affects consistency and standards, since saving is normally seen to be a conventionally stable mechanic. This pattern enhances tension and emotional engagement but risks user frustration if applied excessively or without clear internal logic. +
This pattern introduces a medium level of intervention. By intentionally slowing down interactions, it neglects the principle of “flow”. It prioritizes informed consent and prevents unconscious decisions, while sacrificing a certain level of seamlessness. +
Can evoke a wide spectrum of emotions: frustration, confusion, and relief. It disrupts flow, undermines system reliability, and breaks the expectation of stable feedback loops. Designers must consider mechanisms to contain these reactions to prevent excessive user frustration. +
D
Initially elicits playful disbelief, followed by a profound sense of loss and consequence once the second twist occurs. This creates feelings of shock and frustration, but also heightened immersion as players grapple with real consequences. It aims to create a memorable experience by subverting expectations in a meaningful way. +
E
* '''Vulnerability''': Leaves the playable character exposed to surprise attacks, creating panic and negative effects if a defeat occurs during the save process.
* '''Risk of Loss''': Forces the player to risk losing all time invested in the game session.
* '''Increased Difficulty''': Significantly heightens the challenge by removing the safety net of progress recovery.
* '''Player Frustration''': The manual requirement for saving or the deletion of files can lead to high frustration if the player is suddenly defeated.
+
F
* '''Breaking Predictability''': Violates the principle of consistency and standards.
* '''User Frustration''': If executed poorly, it can lead to confusion or a sense of being cheated.
* '''Accessibility''': Subtly hidden cues may be missed by players with hearing or visual impairments, leading to an accidental but permanent "Game Over."
+
Forced Downtime conflicts with several usability principles. The sudden withdrawal of interaction undermines the users control and freedom, as the system restricts or removes actions that the user has learned to depend on. It breaks consistency by abruptly shifting pacing, feedback timing, or available mechanics. When used purposefully, the momentary denial of agency encourages users to reconsider their previous actions, process narrative or emotional content, or simply experience discomfort as part of the intended atmosphere. +
I
* '''High level of intervention''': The pattern challenges conventions of immediacy and speed by limiting user control and delaying action, which may feel obstructive or paternalistic if applied without transparency or justification.
* '''Calibration vs. Frustration''': Because it creates friction at moments where users might expect seamless interaction, it requires careful calibration to avoid excessive frustration.
* '''Safety and Agency''': By disrupting habitual or impulsive sequences, the pattern reinforces principles of safety and agency that the usability canon often sidelines in favour of speed.
+
L
The pattern intentionally breaks consistency, predictability and user control. It forces players to adapt to new constraints rather than relying on established strategies. This creates friction and can generate confusion or frustration, therefore misuse or lack of justification can produce resistance rather than reflection. +
M
* '''Surprise and Tension''': Mimics can add elements of surprise and unpredictability, enhancing the atmosphere and creating memorable encounters. It rewards careful observation and deliberate exploration.
* '''Psychological Load''': Falling victim to a mimic can cause significant consequences. They increase cognitive load as users must remain vigilant and question the true nature of entities.
* '''Heuristic Violations''': May violate Visibility of system status (Nielsen), Keep users in control (Shneiderman), Consistency and standards (Nielsen/Shneiderman/Bastien & Scapin), and Significance of codes (Bastien & Scapin).
+
This pattern breaks intuitive interaction and creates cognitive dissonance. It requires players to abandon established interpretations and construct new ones. When used wisely, this confusion can heighten attention and promote deeper cognitive engagement. However, a balance between deception and clarity is important to provide a space of certainty. +
O
The system must clarify available options without being too insistent. It is important to emphasize autonomy: the user should remain in control, and the system should assist rather than direct behavior. When implemented effectively, it contributes to digital well-being by reducing impulsive engagement. +
R
This pattern intentionally challenges usability principles that prioritise forgiveness and low cognitive load. Users may not be able to reverse decisions, and the outcome of an action may not be immediately visible. The design becomes less about efficiency and more about cultivating responsibility, emotional engagement, or strategic thinking. +
* '''Medium level of intervention''': Breaks conventional usability principles by intentionally adding friction and slowing down the user flow.
* '''Efficiency vs. Quality''': May reduce efficiency or frustrate users if overused but improves decision quality and reduces errors in high-stakes contexts.
+