Can game grinding be a bad sign of a game's design?

The question is : Can game grinding be a bad sign of a game's design?

Game grinding is a repetitive action that I have heard about in many popular games, which if repeated leads to a burnout. You get burned out from playing because your always resorting to a tactic of game grinding for long periods of playing. If you burnout too often from playing a game, you may start to loose interest in the game. As a game developer, you want to avoid the situation where players loose interest in playing your game.

  • How do you know, where to draw the line in game designing where game grinding is healthy versus where game grinding causes stress to the player, to abandon the game from repeated burnouts?
  • What should a game designer consider when their planning out their game if their game requires players to game grind (e.g. leveling up on skills that a character needs in order to progress to the next part of the game ) in preventing repetitive burnouts ?
Thanks in Advance
 
Last edited:
M

MishMash

Guest
I remember reading an interesting article on this topic a while back, I can't find the original, but this link shares the same sentiment: https://www.designer-notes.com/?p=369

"Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game."

Whilst I can agree with that statement, I prefer to take a slightly different approach to dealing with the grinding problem. Because I think it entirely comes down to how you decide to frame it.

- First of all, I think "grinding" itself has quite a loose definition. You could ultimately analyse any aspect of a game and ask yourself the question "Why am i doing this?", for example, you could look at big RPGs like Skyrim and even say that a fair number of the quests you do are just a means to an end, they are something you are doing to progress in some form. Whether it be to gain levels, get further along in the story etc; At the core, for some players, both of these could be treated as a form of grinding. Even if the repetition is reskinned, the ultimate task and end goal it achieves can remain the same. For certain games, you could argue that the whole process of the game is a grind. Lets take minecraft for example, I'd argue that every aspect of that game ultimately comes down to some form of grind, however its still fun to play. "So you're mining stuff to craft with and crafting stuff to mine with" -- You can extend this into everything you do, ultimately you are progressing so you could perhaps build a base, but there still isn't that much "point" to having a base, it doesn't necessarily serve as much other than something cool to have. The interesting thing here is that you don't really pay attention to the process.

- So what I would do is reframe the topic and identify how can we make the "grind" fun? Rather than trying to remove it, because I think the logic can apply to more game mechanics than meet the eye, you just don't notice it because the actual mechanics themselves are planned with a bit of care:
  • Make the process a bit more engaging, perhaps as a result of having side incentives or mechanics that compliment the grind so that you can complete multiple objectives in one go. E.g. if you need to hunt a specific creature for a specific drop that only falls every now and then, then the actual process of hunting should still feel rewarding.

  • Try to avoid forcing the player to go back to basics. A lot of grinding should feel progressive, that is, once you have done something, that task should become easier to do.

  • Interlink different mechanics so that they all compliment each other, rather than having a flat linear progression. This means that you can continuously progress horizontally and expand your characters skill-set/resources while also moving forward in one direction. I feel that the best games are ones where you don't feel forced into one avenue, but can attempt something once you feel ready to do so.

  • Consider how the player is punished for failure. This can fall into how you want difficulty in your game to work, which is a bit of a different topic, but is nonetheless important. Lets say that death was punishing, you lost all of your items and a bunch of money when you failed a quest because you weren't a high enough level, if going into a quest without being a high enough level would spell certain doom, then players would be dis-incentivised to want to attempt that level, and therefore, they will feel the need to grind more just to avoid failure. At this point, I personally do not like this approach, because it is in-essence forcing the player to grind if they want an increased chance of survival. I much prefer to not punish the player for failing, but reward their success instead. This may mean that players are more willing to take a stab at a quest before they may feel ready because they may be able to complete it with their skill alone.
    As a gamer, if there is a quest or challenging interaction, I much prefer to think about how I can "beat" that challenge on a skill level, i.e. which enemies to kill first, what traps to be aware of, rather than having to constantly worry about losing all my loot.
    There's nothing worse than having to grind to make up for things that you lost, and this is when it becomes tedious.

    I will add however, it also depends on the expectation of the game, and the ultimate value of loot. If your game is about gathering lots of items and building them up, having money etc; then losing that stuff can feel awful. On the flipside however, if there is an expectation that you will die and lose, and that gathered items are just something you acquire quickly, this can change the dynamic. For example in recent looter shooters/battle royale games, there is an expectation that you can just die, so you dont want to be spending too long running around finding things. The skill there can come from finding the balance between quickly and efficiently acquiring items, but also focusing on getting to a point where you have effective weapons. When this is the expectation, generally repeating the process of initial loot gathering isn't bad, simply because that part of the game is quick and should never really become a grind in the first place.
    So, value/importance of loot and its accessibility also plays a part.
    You can actually push this to the point where it ends up being more fun, because you have limited time, and thus your character builds up in different ways, because you dont have the time to get the exact setup you want. The major success of roguelite games came from the notion that each time, you start with a fresh slate, and it never feels like a grind, because you are experience new items and mechanics each time you start up a world. Similarly, with randomly generated games, or tycoon games, I never found the start to be a grind because the world was always a little different at the start, and you had an opportunity to explore multiple avenue's of progression.

The end goal here is to try and remove the concept of grinding from the players head entirely and not have the player feel like they are completing chores to progress. Every action the player makes should feel as interesting as it can be, and there should be motivation behind actions. An interesting approach here is to indirectly make grinding harder, because if it is too easy, it will feel mundane. For example, if a player needs to go and acquire a particular item, rather than them walking from A to B, getting item, and walking back, if we can make that journey a little more interesting, and perhaps itself require some setup (good supplies, weapons etc;) there will be a certain flow to the game, and a newly developed knowledge skill ceiling that experienced players will know to cater for.

Based on what I said originally about core game mechanics such as quests/dungeon clearing technically being a grind, if players felt the same way about the more mundane mechanics as they did about those, then perhaps they wouldn't really even consider it a grind and would simply enjoy the process of exploring the game world. Driving around in games like GTA can technically be a grind, because you aren't really doing anything other than driving, but it's bloody fun to do so :)

So yeah, looking at it technically, the mechanics could still be considered a grind, but that doesn't mean they have to be monotonous, or that you should feel pressured to do so. The best mechanics are ones which make up part of the natural progression and don't necessarily need to be repeated, or if they do, they are in a different context.

Bit of a waffle, but just a dump of my opinions and ideas. Granted, I only play a selection of games, so my personal experience may not be representative of all games. Similarly, I don't like playing really hard games where you have to play a level 30 times before you can beat it, that to me feels like more of a grind than mining a bunch of stone and smelting it in sandbox game, which I find quite relaxing :p
 
What about the issue of having a story plot line of a game? Does it lessen the stress of game grinding for most players?

My friend and I used to play a online MMORPG game called Runescape by Jagex. The game required so much intensive game grinding, that players started resorting to using game bots to progress through their character's skill levels, just to advance through the game. Secondly, there is no outstanding story line to entice the player to be more interested in the game Runescape. There are sideline stories and there are quests with their own story line in the game - but there is no overall story plot line for the whole of the game.

If players have to resort to using game botting to play a game, would that be a bad sign of that game's design, because of game grinding?
 

Jabbers

Member
If players have to resort to using game botting to play a game, would that be a bad sign of that game's design, because of game grinding?
Not necessarily. If your game can be cheated or exploited, it will be. Someone will eventually try to find a shortcut in any game that rewards time and effort. That's human nature.
 

Niels

Member
It's only conceived as grinding when the gameplay loop becomes predictable.
For example:
In the Witcher 3, you can do Witcher contracts.
Those contract mission are basically this loop: pick up quest, go find hints on what mythical creature youre going to face, kill it, turn in quest..
This would lend for REALLY repetive cookycutter grind quests, but the Devs put a lot of work into playing with your expectations, and writing plot twists, that those quests keep you excited to pick up a new one.
 

Morendral

Member
IMO the absolute worst thing is just killing monsters over and over just to level up stats in order to progress. It's boring and horrible, and makes me want to stop playing. To pretty much go with what's above, make grinding part of the natural flow of the game, or it really is poor design.
 
Yeah I'd say the issue is making the core gameplay fun and enjoyable enough that even if you have repetitive ganeplay, it doesn't feel grindy.
As much as I love old Final Fantasy games and the like, I'd often find myself needing to grind weaker enemies because I was too low level to face the bosses who would annihilate me. Those lower level battles turn into spamming the attack option and that's no fun.
Then there's something like Monster Hunter which is just fighting a lot of the same monsters in the same handful of locations. But the combat is so much fun and rewarding, veey skill based, so it rarely feels like grinding. Even fighting super weak monsters can still be fun. And monsters that are far stronger than you are still beatable if you are skillful enough, not just if your level matches some arbitrary amount.
 

CLiolios

Member
The basics, to my understanding, are that, while progressing through the story, without actively avoiding or commencing encounters, the difficulty must scale so that the player can keep progressing without too much trouble, and without having to go back to grind.
This does not apply to extra bosses/areas that are outside the main story and are intentionally harder.
 

Rob

Member
I've been playing some retro games lately and here are some thoughts that popped into my head about grinding, before seeing this topic.

In Secret of Mana (an action RPG) the game never really felt grindy to me. The only time I felt like I was grinding is when I was training up magic levels but your grind is limited by how many Mana Seeds you've unlocked so it's impossible to grind to max level magic in one go. It's a good limit on the players power as well as the amount of grinding they can make themselves do.

The level of power attacks you can perform also depends on how many mana seeds you've been to and you get those levels naturally just by using a weapon. You can probably get away with only using one weapon so this is skippable grind.

I usually spend a little time at the start of SNES/NES RPG's grinding, to maybe get 1 or 2 extra levels which then makes the next part of the game easier, but I only tend to do that on subsequent playthroughs, when I know what to expect and that's my choice and it's not forced upon me so I'm OK with it.

Compare this with my recent experience of Dragon Quest on the NES (I've only just started playing this series, can you believe it?) and the grind is REAL in this game. I have to spend hours in certain areas killing the same monsters for incremental amounts of XP and it's not that much fun tbh. I understand that in the SNES remake they cut the grinding significantly so the devs saw it as a problem (or listened to the whine).

Grinding can be fun when there are constant gains to be made and the player can see some immediate benefit from doing it.

If they know they have to do the same thing for hours before they get a reward then it's not fun!

So Can Grinding be a bad sign of a games design? Yes and no. In any kind of game where you're growing in power by killing stuff or using skills, there can be some grind. You might have designed a game where the player will naturally grow and be at a similar power level to any enemies that he should be currently fighting. Players might decide to fight weaker enemies for longer than you intended in order to make the subsequent parts harder and you can either let them do it or impose penalties to discourage it (lower-no XP gain/Reputation Loss etc). Smart players or those with a lot of knowledge about the mechanics might be able to fight harder enemies at lower levels and you can reward them with a bonus to xp gain or something like that.

I guess the trick is to make grinding hidden, and to make it fun. You want players to have a fun time and to keep playing your game. If players need to become stronger in order to progress then at least give them some kind of small reward along the way, whether it's improved skill with a weapon/more damage vs a monster that you've killed a lot of or something else.

I think an example of what not to do is have grind be a replacement for content. If there are only a few locations and the player has to sit in each of them for hours to level up before they can realistically progress then they're more likely to find another game that gives them more of a gamer-fix.
 

Tsa05

Member
The illusion is in the concept of bad game ;D
There's people who actually enjoy grinding--for some, minimal and casual gameplay with a consistent task leading to an eventual reward is the right kind of game. A grindy game is a good game for them!

Assuming, however, that we'll define grinding as bad, then yes, grinding is a sign of a bad player.
Wait, a bad player? Mmhmhmm!!!!

Have you ever played Overwatch or Fortnite? Those games have insane grind. Hours of play for a "loot box" containing increasingly larger numbers of duplicate items, and even the unique items are actually useless rewards--they're cosmetic only, and don't improve your character or change your gameplay experience and gameplay options in any way. As you level up, you get...nothing! No new powers unlocked, no new game modes or secret areas, no new weapons... Pure grind.

Of course, that's from the perspective of a player who expects material game rewards in exchange for play time. An enthusiast of such games finds enjoyment in the game's mechanics. What appears to be "grinding" is actually the act of playing the game and enjoying the process.

Every game has a grind; The wrong kind of player for that type of game will find themselves grinding, and the player who doesn't "get" the part of the game that was designed to be "the fun part" will find themselves grinding. When you don't enjoy the process of performing the game's tasks, you are grinding.

Some games are "worse" than others, though, and there's where you see design issues. If a game is a shooter, but you have to do lots of non-shooter mechanics, or lots of shooting type tasks that have no tie-in to the game's primary experience, then that's a "bad" grind because it's likely that the player who *ought* to enjoy the game's mechanics isn't able to enjoy because of required mechanics that pull the player away from the real intent of the game.

Imagine Overwatch, but in order to queue for a multiplayer match, you have to complete some number of "side missions" to unlock the maps to play on...
Imagine Secret of Mana, but having to do a connect-3 mini game to recharge your power bar every fight.

When a game feels like a grind, what's really happening is that the game is giving you lots of a certain kind of experience that you don't find fun. A game can have 100% a single mechanic, and it'll be fun for some and a complete grind for others. All games struggle with this balance--how much fun is the player having in battle after battle...does the player want to try something else? "Grind" is inherently a sign of a poor fit between player and game mechanic, and if enough parts of your game feel like a grind to enough diverse players, then yes, it's a sign of objective badness :D
 

Gradius

Member
Grinding, by its original definition, is strictly a bad thing. Progress should not feel like a chore.
If a player isn't enjoying the moment-to-moment gameplay but is instead just addicted to the idea of reaching a goal that isn't a good sign at all.
Achieving a goal (levelling up, defeating a boss, gathering resources) can still take a while and involve repeative gameplay loops but they should be engaging in some way. If it is fun, or if the player enters a zen state then you've got a good loop. If it is dull and just involves holding a button down for 45 minutes then you've designed something that's only merit is being psychologically addictive.
 
Is game grinding more of a problem with most popular online games that are played? Or does it exist just as bad with offline games such as those that are computer or game console based?
 
Grinding, by its original definition, is strictly a bad thing. Progress should not feel like a chore.
If a player isn't enjoying the moment-to-moment gameplay but is instead just addicted to the idea of reaching a goal that isn't a good sign at all.
Achieving a goal (levelling up, defeating a boss, gathering resources) can still take a while and involve repeative gameplay loops but they should be engaging in some way. If it is fun, or if the player enters a zen state then you've got a good loop. If it is dull and just involves holding a button down for 45 minutes then you've designed something that's only merit is being psychologically addictive.
What if players have to resort to game botting just to get around game grinding for achieving new levels? Is it the fault of the player or the game design?
 
Grinding is the cheapest Progression System, but its not bad design only if its designed badly. Grinding with a good dynamic could be worthwhile & help pad out material, but its key to know how to pace the player which takes some mastery. Grinding can also be a cathartic experience, where the player loses themselves in a series of objective tasks.

Grinding could be your best friend or worse enemy. Or a Double Edge sword.
 

NazGhuL

NazTaiL
From myself and my friends: The more we are getting old, the more we hate grinding. (I remember playing countless hours leveling up characters in FF3)
As game time decreased, we want better game time quality.

I'm now less interested to cut 500 trees to build a shelter.
Being in front of a tree, holding the left mouse button earing the chop/chop/chop sound...again and again...
Is digging hundreds of dirt blocks is a good game moment? In my opinion: NO.

Is Minecraft only about breaking blocks? Nope.
It's about creation, art, being with friends.

Build something around the grinding.
Chopping trees is not fun.
Chopping trees, bare hand, while avoiding bullets comming from the enemy lines while zombies are running after your guts in a post apocalypse world filled with exploding cows is more fun.
 

Vxss57

Member
Personally i like grinding games but grinding itself has to have a purpose.
Right now im playing one of the grindiest games ever, Life is feudal. To get my Artisan skill up to 60, i had to shovel dirt hours and hours real time to achieve this, but i was able to flatten the ground for a road, decreasing my travel time to a trade post, so it was worth it.
 
A

Ankokushin

Guest
Personally i like grinding games but grinding itself has to have a purpose.
Right now im playing one of the grindiest games ever, Life is feudal. To get my Artisan skill up to 60, i had to shovel dirt hours and hours real time to achieve this, but i was able to flatten the ground for a road, decreasing my travel time to a trade post, so it was worth it.
This is an interesting example. i would not say this is your typical grinding because, like it or not, you decided to take this path. You did not need to do it for the game to continue. Creating an alternative boos that you can only fight in level 100 is not a problem if you don´t force the players to fight it. But holding story-progress behind mindless repetitive tasks is problematic imo
 
C

Cowlord

Guest
I love MMOs that have a ton of grinding that I actually enjoy cuz it's kinda zen... but f you blizzard for making me grind out flying annually. :p
 

Joe Ellis

Member
Out of all the games I've played, Quake 1 is the least boring, and I dont think it has any game grinding. each time it feels different
I remember alot of games with game grinding, most memorable is rayman 3, and I love rayman, but that one just had too many repetative battles and "slush"
you just end up getting tired and bored, the same thing happened when I played doom, however that was when I used invincibility, when I was a kid, but even now if I played it, you just basically shoot and kill,
Other games I find least boring are Crash Bandicoot, 1, 2, & 3, Spyro 1, and medievil 1
They always had alot of different stuff going on and never felt repetative
Rayman 1 is also a big game that I can still play now, even though iv finished it alot

Jet set radio future is amazing, and has loads of replay value, though you can only get it on original xbox

mad dash is good (on original xbox) especially with muliplayer (multiple controllers! 4 max)

and timesplitters 3 - future perfect, that is really cool, also on original xbox, I need to buy an old xbox lol

I would say that game grinding is a sign of bad game design, and laziness, I was dissappointed with rayman3, it had amazing graphics and worlds but the actual levels and stuff you had to do in them I felt was lazy, even when I was ten
 
Top