Wondering about life from the POV of a gamer.

Life For Gamers

<img src="/uploads/ekaterina-shevchenko-zltlhekbh04-unsplash.jpg" alt="Gift box in wrapping paper with ribbon" title="How are gifts in Games and IRL" height="442" width="640" />

Photo by [Ekaterina Shevchenko](https://unsplash.com/@shekatherine?utm_content=creditCopyText&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_source=unsplash) on [Unsplash](https://unsplash.com/photos/wrapped-gift-box-ZLTlHeKbh04?utm_content=creditCopyText&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_source=unsplash)

Giving decent gifts to npcs in games is usually a great way to increase affection. But IRL it's not the same. Could it be better in games?

# Gift Mechanics in Games

Give an okay gift to an NPC in a game then you increase their affection. If it's a gift that they want, the affection goes up more. Give something they don't like (like a spider maybe) then affection goes down. Simple right?

But as a gamer, you want to also go for a bigger increase in affection. So you mass "procure" their favorite item. And then you can marry them day one!

As a game designer this is not intended. So you put a limit on the amount of gifts you can give per day to 1. Now it's impossible to be that creepy and give a thousand cabbages in a single day.

You can still be creepy (and mostly thoughtless) if you give the same gift everyday even if it's their favourite. But they would still love you more. Such is the limitation of current gift giving in a lot of games currently. The games are still fun though.

But how is it in real life?

# Gift Mechanics IRL

We are going to assume the most naive interpretation of gift giving in real life. So no cultural traditions, holiday gift giving, financial sketchiness, political maneuvering etc... Each one of those would require a separate article and some I am not going to cover.

When giving a gift and it's accepted. There isn't an expectation of anything to be returned. There is an outward expectation that the giver and receiver would be on somewhat positive terms afterward.

But what if you want to be closer faster? Can't use the same "spam gift of their favourite item" trick you can sometimes use in video games. Even if you are limited to one gift a day, if you give the same gift over and over you get a diminishing effective. Why? Many potential factors really. Supply and demand, Equity Theory, humans brains desiring new stimulus, etc... Let's go over some of them.

## Supply and Demand

This should be straight forward. If supply is higher than demand then the value goes down. If it's the other way then the value goes up. If you bring so much supply of the same gift everyday then the value of your gift naturally goes down in the eyes of the receiver.

## Equity Theory Proposition III & IV

Has four propositions. We'll talk about only Proposition III & IV. Why? Because it kinda deserves an entire series of articles. This article is getting long and I can farm more content talking about Equity Theory.

Here they are.

> Proposition III: Given societal pressures, people are most comfortable when they perceive that they are getting roughly what they deserve from life and love. If people feel over-benefited, they may experience pity, guilt, and shame. If they feel under-benefited, they may experience anger, sadness, and resentment.
>
> Proposition IV: People in inequitable relationships will attempt to reduce their distress through a variety of techniques – by restoring psychological equity, actual equity, or leaving the relationship.
>
> Rapson, R. L., & Hatfield, E. (2012). Equity Theory in Close Relationships. *Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology*, 200–217. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n36

Interesting but how does it apply to our gift giving scenario?

According to proposition III the receiver of the everyday same gift would feel immensely guilty and shameful. Much distress! Why? Because they would feel over-benefited. But what would they do to fix it? According to proposition IV the receiver would make it equal mentally, actually or just stop interacting with the giver.

## The Classic "But I Gave You so many Gifts!" Scenario

So... what happens when the receiver asks the giver to stop? Giver gets confused and maybe angry and resentful as per Proposition III. Receiver experiences severe relationship whiplash from surface-level extreme positive to extreme negative. How this plays out? Many different ways.

# "Roughly" Equal is Relative... Probably

Now time for personal unverified anecdote theory. Why? Because I am not holding myself to a higher standard and declaring it so. So here we go!

So what if a middle class person dates a top 1% person? The give and take disparity tolerance is likely different. Usually it's around the price of a meal. But how much is a meal for a middle class person compared to a top 1%'er? One person would feel okay for a gift from the 1%'er but definitely not the other. And now the romantic comedy misunderstanding begins!

Just remember, it's all about perception!

<aside>Equity Theory is the Reason why Ryou likes Claire at first in Fading Hearts. </aside>

# So Can Games Do Better?

Short answer: Yes but its more work.

Long answer:  Player can still try to maximize value. The game developer has to make a much more but somewhat doable item/gift system.

Let's make a quick design for illustration. Every item has a list of tags/needs it satisfies and some sort of amount the item satisfies the need by. Also a perceived monetary value should be added. For each need it also keeps track a method it satisfies them by. Let's make them display, equip, and consume.

Then give each NPC a list of needs, wants, etc. Then when you give a gift it should satisfy a need. The need satisfied should also increase relationship points or something. The need should slowly go back up over time.

NPCs should also track give-and-take (GAT) value gap and also have a GAT tolerance level. NPC should start rejecting gifts if the GAT tolerance level gets exceeded. There would be also be situational GAT tolerance modifiers like emergencies, hunger,  etc...

As the NPC gets the item more often, there would be a supply-and-demand modifier and maybe an over-exposure modifier since the brain wants to experience new things as well.

# So You are Saying it's Possible...

Yes... very doable. Just a lot more data and testing to see if actually functions as expected. Also may require some sort of time mechanic.

So enjoy this theoretical gift giving system that you will likely never play! Hooray! Though this could be expanded for a wider economy sim of NPCs. Stay tuned next time! Maybe I'll talk more about Equity Theory!

<img src="/uploads/ekaterina-shevchenko-zltlhekbh04-unsplash.jpg" alt="Gift box in wrapping paper with ribbon" title="How are gifts in Games and IRL" height="442" width="640" />
<p>Photo by <a href="https://unsplash.com/@shekatherine?utm_content=creditCopyText&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_source=unsplash">Ekaterina Shevchenko</a> on <a href="https://unsplash.com/photos/wrapped-gift-box-ZLTlHeKbh04?utm_content=creditCopyText&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_source=unsplash">Unsplash</a></p>
<p>Giving decent gifts to npcs in games is usually a great way to increase affection. But IRL it's not the same. Could it be better in games?</p>
<h1>Gift Mechanics in Games</h1>
<p>Give an okay gift to an NPC in a game then you increase their affection. If it's a gift that they want, the affection goes up more. Give something they don't like (like a spider maybe) then affection goes down. Simple right?</p>
<p>But as a gamer, you want to also go for a bigger increase in affection. So you mass &quot;procure&quot; their favorite item. And then you can marry them day one!</p>
<p>As a game designer this is not intended. So you put a limit on the amount of gifts you can give per day to 1. Now it's impossible to be that creepy and give a thousand cabbages in a single day.</p>
<p>You can still be creepy (and mostly thoughtless) if you give the same gift everyday even if it's their favourite. But they would still love you more. Such is the limitation of current gift giving in a lot of games currently. The games are still fun though.</p>
<p>But how is it in real life?</p>
<h1>Gift Mechanics IRL</h1>
<p>We are going to assume the most naive interpretation of gift giving in real life. So no cultural traditions, holiday gift giving, financial sketchiness, political maneuvering etc... Each one of those would require a separate article and some I am not going to cover.</p>
<p>When giving a gift and it's accepted. There isn't an expectation of anything to be returned. There is an outward expectation that the giver and receiver would be on somewhat positive terms afterward.</p>
<p>But what if you want to be closer faster? Can't use the same &quot;spam gift of their favourite item&quot; trick you can sometimes use in video games. Even if you are limited to one gift a day, if you give the same gift over and over you get a diminishing effective. Why? Many potential factors really. Supply and demand, Equity Theory, humans brains desiring new stimulus, etc... Let's go over some of them.</p>
<h2>Supply and Demand</h2>
<p>This should be straight forward. If supply is higher than demand then the value goes down. If it's the other way then the value goes up. If you bring so much supply of the same gift everyday then the value of your gift naturally goes down in the eyes of the receiver.</p>
<h2>Equity Theory Proposition III &amp; IV</h2>
<p>Has four propositions. We'll talk about only Proposition III &amp; IV. Why? Because it kinda deserves an entire series of articles. This article is getting long and I can farm more content talking about Equity Theory.</p>
<p>Here they are.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Proposition III: Given societal pressures, people are most comfortable when they perceive that they are getting roughly what they deserve from life and love. If people feel over-benefited, they may experience pity, guilt, and shame. If they feel under-benefited, they may experience anger, sadness, and resentment.</p>
<p>Proposition IV: People in inequitable relationships will attempt to reduce their distress through a variety of techniques – by restoring psychological equity, actual equity, or leaving the relationship.</p>
<p>Rapson, R. L., &amp; Hatfield, E. (2012). Equity Theory in Close Relationships. <em>Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology</em>, 200–217. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249222.n36</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Interesting but how does it apply to our gift giving scenario?</p>
<p>According to proposition III the receiver of the everyday same gift would feel immensely guilty and shameful. Much distress! Why? Because they would feel over-benefited. But what would they do to fix it? According to proposition IV the receiver would make it equal mentally, actually or just stop interacting with the giver.</p>
<h2>The Classic &quot;But I Gave You so many Gifts!&quot; Scenario</h2>
<p>So... what happens when the receiver asks the giver to stop? Giver gets confused and maybe angry and resentful as per Proposition III. Receiver experiences severe relationship whiplash from surface-level extreme positive to extreme negative. How this plays out? Many different ways.</p>
<h1>&quot;Roughly&quot; Equal is Relative... Probably</h1>
<p>Now time for personal unverified anecdote theory. Why? Because I am not holding myself to a higher standard and declaring it so. So here we go!</p>
<p>So what if a middle class person dates a top 1% person? The give and take disparity tolerance is likely different. Usually it's around the price of a meal. But how much is a meal for a middle class person compared to a top 1%'er? One person would feel okay for a gift from the 1%'er but definitely not the other. And now the romantic comedy misunderstanding begins!</p>
<p>Just remember, it's all about perception!</p>
<aside>Equity Theory is the Reason why Ryou likes Claire at first in Fading Hearts. </aside>
<h1>So Can Games Do Better?</h1>
<p>Short answer: Yes but its more work.</p>
<p>Long answer:  Player can still try to maximize value. The game developer has to make a much more but somewhat doable item/gift system.</p>
<p>Let's make a quick design for illustration. Every item has a list of tags/needs it satisfies and some sort of amount the item satisfies the need by. Also a perceived monetary value should be added. For each need it also keeps track a method it satisfies them by. Let's make them display, equip, and consume.</p>
<p>Then give each NPC a list of needs, wants, etc. Then when you give a gift it should satisfy a need. The need satisfied should also increase relationship points or something. The need should slowly go back up over time.</p>
<p>NPCs should also track give-and-take (GAT) value gap and also have a GAT tolerance level. NPC should start rejecting gifts if the GAT tolerance level gets exceeded. There would be also be situational GAT tolerance modifiers like emergencies, hunger,  etc...</p>
<p>As the NPC gets the item more often, there would be a supply-and-demand modifier and maybe an over-exposure modifier since the brain wants to experience new things as well.</p>
<h1>So You are Saying it's Possible...</h1>
<p>Yes... very doable. Just a lot more data and testing to see if actually functions as expected. Also may require some sort of time mechanic.</p>
<p>So enjoy this theoretical gift giving system that you will likely never play! Hooray! Though this could be expanded for a wider economy sim of NPCs. Stay tuned next time! Maybe I'll talk more about Equity Theory!</p>


Giving Gifts in Games and IRL


<img src="/uploads/Attraction-by-Exposure.png" style="width: fit-content; max-height: 30vh;" />

One of the most common ways to "get the love interest" in Visual Novels is simple. Get all of their events. But is that true for real life?

But first let's explore exposure as a video game mechanic.

# Exposure as a Dating Sim Game Mechanic

The most basic mechanic for Visual Novels and Dating Sims is very simple.
You trigger as many events as you can with the desired love interest.
Then you increase your affection rating somehow as a result. Sometimes
you may need to make a few correct choices. However at least this put
you on their "path".

As an aside understanding this strategy was key in funneling players to get the
"worst ending" in Fading Hearts accidentally. They would try this strategy
on one of the love interests, make choices that are extremely tempting yet
wrong, then get the worst but most deeply cathartic ending. The numbers and timing was tuned so that this would consistently happen if they followed that
strategy.

Then they would have a huge desire to discover how this worst ending occurred. And when they did they discovered the method would understand the meaning behind it.

But more on that some other time.

# Mere Exposure IRL

How does this work in real life? Almost the same actually. It really helps
you get in the door and talking with a person you are interested in. Foot in
the door. Just like in the video games.

However if you have consistent negative interactions all the
time without some sort of random reward schedule it won't work further.
And let's be honest... having all positive interactions all the time
sometimes feel unnatural. So there really needs to be decent follow up.

Marketing tends to "Mere Exposure" this a lot with spamming advertisements at a basic level.

# Fiction Mimicks Reality

So this basic dating-sim mechanic of exposure is very similiar to how it functions
in real life. From what it can do and it's limitations.

Next time we'll get into how a dating game mechanic doesn't quite match up
to how it goes in real life.

[Disclaimer: This article is absolutely written to (likely ineffectively)
convince you buy our games while you gain knowledge. Enjoy the content!]


<img src="/uploads/Attraction-by-Exposure.png" style="width: fit-content; max-height: 30vh;" />
<p>One of the most common ways to &quot;get the love interest&quot; in Visual Novels is simple. Get all of their events. But is that true for real life?</p>
<p>But first let's explore exposure as a video game mechanic.</p>
<h1>Exposure as a Dating Sim Game Mechanic</h1>
<p>The most basic mechanic for Visual Novels and Dating Sims is very simple.
You trigger as many events as you can with the desired love interest.
Then you increase your affection rating somehow as a result. Sometimes
you may need to make a few correct choices. However at least this put
you on their &quot;path&quot;.</p>
<p>As an aside understanding this strategy was key in funneling players to get the
&quot;worst ending&quot; in Fading Hearts accidentally. They would try this strategy
on one of the love interests, make choices that are extremely tempting yet
wrong, then get the worst but most deeply cathartic ending. The numbers and timing was tuned so that this would consistently happen if they followed that
strategy.</p>
<p>Then they would have a huge desire to discover how this worst ending occurred. And when they did they discovered the method would understand the meaning behind it.</p>
<p>But more on that some other time.</p>
<h1>Mere Exposure IRL</h1>
<p>How does this work in real life? Almost the same actually. It really helps
you get in the door and talking with a person you are interested in. Foot in
the door. Just like in the video games.</p>
<p>However if you have consistent negative interactions all the
time without some sort of random reward schedule it won't work further.
And let's be honest... having all positive interactions all the time
sometimes feel unnatural. So there really needs to be decent follow up.</p>
<p>Marketing tends to &quot;Mere Exposure&quot; this a lot with spamming advertisements at a basic level.</p>
<h1>Fiction Mimicks Reality</h1>
<p>So this basic dating-sim mechanic of exposure is very similiar to how it functions
in real life. From what it can do and it's limitations.</p>
<p>Next time we'll get into how a dating game mechanic doesn't quite match up
to how it goes in real life.</p>
<p>[Disclaimer: This article is absolutely written to (likely ineffectively)
convince you buy our games while you gain knowledge. Enjoy the content!]</p>
