Cheese Grinders

Lately I've noticed a lot of talk about Cheesing in video games. While at first I was really excited (mostly because I was reminded of that south park episode that did that tie-in to Heavy Metal which is South Park and Not Safe for Work). However, I quickly realized that this had nothing to do with that, but in fact had more to do with video-games and grinding (I then got excited again because I could write a blog post with a pun in it).

So before I dive too deep into anything; I'm going to define a lot of abstractions in this post and I will define them as I go. You are going to have to suspend some of your preconceived notions about the terms I will use, but I will try to keep from being too misleading.

What is Cheeseing?
It seems to be that players are calling 'cheesing' the act of using bugs and exploits in a game to more efficiently grind for stuff. Often this seems to be not what the developers intended. Players who cheese are often quick to comment that the developers 'cheesed first' by adding grindy game mechanics to 'artificially' expand the life of their game. 

This rough definition already tells us a lot about cheesing. It's an action that arises with the dynamic of grindy game-play. I'm defining a 'dynamic' in the MDA sense of it being an interaction of multiple rules. It also shows that it's sort of a negative thing and breaking players immersion in the game. It seems like it's unfair by players (and can be done by players to developers or by developers to players).

But there are plenty of games that have the component parts of grinding (resource gathering over time, levels, unlocked items and abilities) that seem to not be 'cheesed'. I think this really comes down to a a difference in the resource dynamics of the game. Simply put its a single question; Is the game about resource gathering or resource allocation (or resource management)?

Resource Gathering seems to lead to cheesing and grinding behaviors. Typically it's because resources are items that are inconsistent gathered (ie random drops) and 'spent' (repeatedly like a currency) and  restrict game-play options. Essentially random resources limit the possibility space (all the things they can think to do) the player can explore.  Players then grind these resources to expand their possibility space. Often with currencies players will be very efficient, or number crunch the resource gathering statistics to become most efficient (this action is important). Players will also typically hoard resources and/or use them as a type of currency if they can trade them. An interesting thing to note is that if players are not engaged, the time they play is a resource. This means they will find the quickest way to gather resources or items that expand the possibility space. So if your game has items or abilities that are unlocked by some sort of resource, players will attempt to find the most efficient way to unlock those abilities. Since time/effort is a resource, players will find the most efficient way to get random drops of items. 

Resource Allocation doesn't quite seem to lead to cheesing and grinding behaviors. Often the difference is that resource allocation starts with the entire possibility set exposed (or exposes it at a constant/non-random rate). Also the items that gate the player are not obtained through resource spending, or they are but the resources are gathered at a constant rate. In this way the player had direct agency over what options are exposed. This means the player is making decisions about what content they get to see. In a competition, this means that both players are working with the same set of resources. You can't grind this system, you have to achieve in it.

When breaking these systems down into their component parts you see this is a difference in the use of randomness. The additional use of  random number generation in systems tend to make it more prone to grindy behavior. What you are seeing is players pressing buttons for extrinsic motivators, like they are almost literally in a Skinner Box.

Suddenly player vitriol and their penchant for cheese makes sense.

I think a lot of the complaints and behavior simply come from players becoming aware of their place in the system and attempting to rebel. The random system kinda fakes the agency that players have, and players are becoming aware. I don't think that means that player wont play and guy games with skinner box mechanics but I do think it means that there is a market for games that specifically move away from these systems. 

The Point

Games that have heavily moved away from systems with heavy randomization have had a stronger competitive following. The strong competitive communities (Fighting Games, MOBAs, RTS, some First and Third Person Shooters) have very little randomness in their game systems. I think the prevalence of streamers and other hard core players in social media make the prospects of a less random game to be worth the additional complexity in its construction, especially if it appeals to their sentiments. Cutting out the grinding and the cheese is something that is a worth while effort to put into a game.

The Meeting List

Have you ever sat in a four hour meeting with 8 people and at the end of it were not sure what you accomplished? If you have, you wasted four days of individual work. Don't do it again!

Meetings are not some do or die silver bullet to your problems. It feels powerful to get everyone together to try and tackle a mammoth problem. It feels like being cave men and killing a mammoth. But that's how it feels, that's not what it is. 

Meetings are a performance sport like marching band, or rhythm gymnastics, or dance competitions, or cheer leading. There is no directly opposing team, it's about doing your best and it takes hard work and practice to get better. What matters in a meeting is what 'thing' you deliver and how long it takes you to deliver that 'thing'.

As a game designer, I have learned certain rules and patterns that help to create a more effective meeting. Here is a list of 6 things that make meetings more effective.

The Meeting List

1. Meetings solve specific issues.
Every meeting has a specific goal. The meeting is a reaction to a problem. This creates a lot of tension walking into a meeting, but your going to have an agenda that's going to be your process to fixing any problem you have.

2. Meetings deliver real things.
Meetings create plans to tackle problems or revisions to documents. These need to be actual things (such as an email or document). The person in charge of these plans (the manager/producer) is the Directly Responsible Individual for taking the results of the meeting and putting it into the document or task tracking software or email or presentation specification.

3. Meetings have an agenda.
Know your task and your time. Understand what/how you are going to discuss and how you are going to come to a solution. Also know how long you are going to spend on each task in a meeting. You may even go so-far as to elect someone whose sole job is to be a time-keeper for the meeting. It's gonna be hard the first couple of times and you may need to cut people off, but it will keep your meeting on time. Your manager/producers job is to run the meeting to the agenda.

This changes the dynamics of your meetings and can make them very intense. Every 25 minutes needs a 5 minute break.

4. Codes of conduct and rules
Meetings need to be respected, the agenda needs to be respected, above all team members need to be respected. Basic elementary school rules apply. Be compassionate. Remember you are in a meeting to solve a problem and a any solution is better than no solution. You win as a team and you lose as a team, and everyone is on the same team. If people are afraid to come to meetings, change how your meetings work.

5. Meetings are safe
Ideas are safe in meetings. People are safe in meetings.  Don't fire people in a meeting. Ideas are not stupid in meetings (this is the place for ideas!). If someone does have a stupid idea, ask them to explain more (stupid is a communication problem). The rules and conduct are important, but the people in the meeting are going to work much longer than the meeting will last. If you break a rule in a meeting that's OK (try to do better in your next meeting), if you break a relationship or confidence or trust that's not OK.

6. Meetings are fun
Don't fear the meeting. You'll get better at meetings, you'll be more efficient at meetings. Meetings aren't the moment when you take down the mammoth, they are actually the moment when you realize you can take down a leviathan!

P.S.
Meetings are not meant to inform (those are presentations).

Sources on this stuff
SPACER
(note: try to work in more 'expectations' into this list)
Toyota Method
(I want to work in more about 'going to the location' but controlling attention is hard enough)
Generic Business Website Interview With CEO
(notably Steve Jobs and others view on 'less people is more results')
My Own Meandering Experience
(a lot goes with meetings I've run (or I see being run) and conversations with my dad who was a manager and a mechanical engineer and work I had with several college professors)
Game Design
(Time limits and the act of timing things creates more engagement (and stress) the agenda also helps focus people and provide feedback as items are completed. The short time limit of meetings helps people resist burnout (and a meeting is an expensive way to spend a persons time)... Game Design is a thing, the game design of a meeting is kinda its own post!)