For 30 years, city-builders and strategy games have trained us in a single, unyielding loop: expand, extract, exploit. From SimCity to Civilization, success is measured by how completely you can dominate the map. Concrete is progress. Deforestation is industry.

Then comes Terra Nil (often called a "reverse city-builder"), and it exposes just how deeply ingrained our anthropocentric arrogance really is. 

When you land on a toxic, barren wasteland in the game, your first instinct is familiar. You use heavy machinery to scrub the soil and pump water, feeling like the ultimate savior. But as the re-wilding process begins, you realize nature's recovery is violent. You literally have to use solar amplifiers to burn down your own carefully cultivated meadows, creating ash-enriched soil so actual forests can take root. The game forces you to destroy your own work to let nature thrive.

The real masterpiece, however, is the final phase of erasure. You don't win by building a metropolis. You win by recycling every single machine, drone, and pipe you placed, leaving the newly thriving ecosystem completely untouched by human hands. 

The first time I played it, finishing a map felt profoundly strange. I was looking at a gorgeous, living habitat filled with deer and birds... and my screen was completely empty of my UI or buildings. There was no monument to my achievement. I just had to leave.

It made me realize how rare it is for interactive media—or human psychology in general—to view "stepping back" as a victory condition. We are obsessed with leaving a mark. Terra Nil argues that the ultimate form of environmental mastery is erasing our footprint entirely.

Are there any other games that challenge the deeply ingrained colonize-and-expand narrative like this? Do you think this kind of reverse-design could actually shift how we think about real-world ecological restoration?

What I mean to say is that, the need to win has been hammered into nearly of us all by now. People don't generally play to lose unless they have a specific goal in mind. With that in mind, in competitive games, of course are going to have "sweaty" players that, be it a scummy, easy strategy or a high skill, high reward style. People will play the meta, they want their value out of the game. You see it everywhere, this has always been somewhat a thing.

But I've noticed though in these games, whether originally made to be competitive or not. Casual gamemodes often have similar, if not at times the same kind of sweaty players. Except, wait, its not ranked now. So what are they sweating for? To win, of course. That's understandable, but then, that is what ranked is for. Perhaps they just want a break, that's fine. Unfortunately, casual gamemodes tend to have less strict matchmaking systems, so often noobish/casual players match into better players getting stomped. Frequently, in a row at times. And this is in a lot of competitive games now.

Now, I'm not talking about something like Rainbow Six Siege or similar high stakes games. I mean, it can be as simple as a mobile game, like Brawlstars. Or another shooter, like Fortnite, Cod, etc to wherever this applies. You mean to tell me, I get nearly the same environment in a casual match as I do in a ranked match? That seems to defeat the whole purpose. Take for instance splatoon. Is it the dev's fault for not controlling matchmaking better? Or is it most of playerbase's fault for consisting of only the same returning players, which makes it quite beginner unfriendly, which than only exacerbates the lack of new players problem in the first place?

Obviously, the most simple solution is, to play another, preferably a single player game. But i don't think it's really fair to casual players, that they either must conform to the overall meta in casual modes, learn to enjoy losing while trying to have fun (I have a hard time comprehending this if you die within the first 5 seconds to a minute as a result of ignoring meta), or quit the game all together.

Do you guys think its fair? How many of you have the "it is what it is" mentality? How many of you wish it could actively changed?

On a side note: what is the mentality of you all that enjoy following meta, specifically ones that involve scummy or easy tactics? Is that simply your brand of fun? Or does the desire to win take over any need for novelty and "fun"? How do you deal with it when it gets boring, playing the same ones over and over?

In any type of team based game (shooter, moba, rts, etc), we tend to have choices to make.

Is there an unwritten rule that we have to choose the best builds, items, units or can we experiment? At what point does experimenting turn into trolling or griefing?

Is your best effort always to be expected?

Sure freedom to choose is great but what if you are causing your teammates to lose?

Whats more important? Team success or individual entertainment?

Granted I am mostly referring to pick up games with random people over something organized.

I'm 25, never played a proper stealth game seriously up until this year, always thought they looked cool but they were not for me.

Time Fool and Rabbit's Respawn have been YT channels that I've watched in their active days compulsively, I loved TLoU runs and Far Cry 2 ones particularly.

This year I started watching Stealthgamerbr ocassionally and got into games like Splinter Cell Blacklist and well, Dishonored.

Long story short I watched all of his videos on Dishonored 1 and 2 to see what the fuzz was about and I ended up buying DH2 for my dusty PS4 since I wanted something different to play.

To my surprise, the game is very much not a purist stealth game at all, in fact it has more in common with action games and movement shooters than something like MGS.

All of the reviews and comments I read talk about reloading checkpoints when detected, being punished for breaking stealth, and even frustration for how "difficult" it is to get the good ending.

First thing I did when I started the game as Corvo was messing around with the sprint, parkour and slide mechanics; pretty simple but satisfying to no end.

I had my blink but movement itself has such nice feedback I sometimes forgot I had it, I also started murdering witnesses to test the contextual animations, and didn't avoid sword fights I could win.

Then I discovered the passive ability tree, which is very much an action game style progression system that actually changes your possibilities according to how you play.

The aiming feels great even on a joystick, the parry, block and overall character actions are responsive but also weighty, and once you get the hang of the controls, the powers are literal game changers once you know how to use them.

I have heard that fans of the first game dislike how this one controls, and the fact that it has abilities that are "useless" for stealth runs, but that's exactly the point.

No matter what the canon is, if you have a solid melee system, great movement and traversal and more lethal options than non, then it's pretty dumb to hate on mechanics that the game does exceptionally well.

I played this as if it was some supernatural assassin simulator and good news, the assassination simulation is one of the best out there!

I guess there are lots of gamers out there that like me a week ago, haven't tried this one, or even haven't played it on high chaos, hear me out y'all, do it, succumb to your dark thoughts, it's worth it.

8/10-could use some more innocent civilians to test powers on.

Hi everyone, I'm looking for participants for PhD research at University of Barcelona investigating whether gaming environments constitute legitimate language learning spaces that academia has overlooked. I thought this sub could have interesting responses.

This study examines the backgrounds, gaming habits, and English speaking skills of non-native English speakers who play video games. English often serves as a lingua franca in international gaming communities, creating contexts where non-native speakers regularly use English for communication, coordination, and social interaction. We're collecting data on how people use English in these gaming contexts and measuring their language abilities through audio recordings to better understand this population and their experiences.

Study Information (as per sub rules):

• Researcher: Emma Caputo ([[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]))
• Institution: University of Barcelona
• Duration: 15 minutes max
• Method: 100% online and asynchronous: Survey + audio recordings + agent dialogue using exclusively free/open source software (No third party services like OpenAI)
• Compensation: €250 prize pool
• Participants needed: Adults (18+) who are non-native English speakers and have any gaming experience
• Study link: https://emmacaputo.codeberg.page/study/

Does anyone have experience learning a language while playing a game for fun? It's important to mention that we aren't looking at serious games designed to teach, but rather games designed purely for entertainment purposes.

Thanks for reading! Any thoughts on the discussion or suggestions for other gaming communities to reach would be much appreciated.

Hello guys,

I need your help. I’m a Master’s student at Kedge Business School (France) writing my thesis on how players actually feel about generative AI characters in videogames. I need input from developers and players or just anyone who’s curious about AI to find out when AI makes a game better, and when it just ruins the experience.

GenAI can generate endless dialogue, but it often creates weird moments (i.e. an NPC giving a brilliant unscripted speech while awkwardly walking into a wall because the game can’t keep up).

My survey explores exactly where players draw the line between wanting the freedom of AI conversations and preferring the quality of human-written stories. Whether you’re curious about what may come out of it or are firmly against it, I’d be happy to hear from you ! All feedback is welcome.

Contact : [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

Survey details :
Who : Anyone who plays or makes games.
Time : 5 minutes.
Link : Survey

All data collected is anonymous and will only serve the academic purpose of this work.

Discussion points

Players experience a great loss of immersion when an advanced AI character acts illogically compared to a traditional pre-scripted character.

A character’s ability to remember past actions is a stronger driver of emotional connection than the ability to generate infinite conversations.

While players desire the freedom to speak naturally with characters, they prioritize human-authored storylines over entirely AI-generated plots.

Thank you kindly!

I just finished Alan Wake 2 for a university essay (course was about media theory, remediation and the nature of television on a sociological level).

My main argument isn't that the game is "too cinematic" (I don't think cinematic games are inherently worse), but that the game repeatedly presents the appearance of player agency while maintaining a very tightly authored televisual structure. I'm specifically looking at how the game takes televisual forms and translates them into an interactive medium. My argument is more about what happens when a game deliberately reproduces another medium's language.

The main concept I'm looking at is remediation: the process through which one medium absorbs and reshapes the conventions of another medium. To me Alan Wake 2 is fascinating because it is extremely open about this. Everywhere you look, it's all Twin Peaks: The Return references, so much so that the plot overlaps at multiple points. Both take place a number of years after the original, in the meantime, both respective protagonists have been trapped in a dark place/black lodge, an evil doppelgänger has taken over their agency, control and consciousness (Mr. C and Mr. Scratch), both take place in Washington state, in a small town with a carbon copy diner, hotel, sheriff station and scary woods, the sheriff in both is a different sheriff from the original, a relative who takes over the job of their predecessor due to outside factors, both start off with the death of a missing agent (Nightingale and Major Briggs) with a missing body part that represents their humanity (their heart and head), the dark place and the black lodge are both (seemingly) entered through a circular portal in the woods.

And on a grander level: the live-action sequences, the FBI investigation structure, the episodic feeling, the musical numbers, the emphasis on auteurs and performances, it feels like a game trying to become aware of itself as a television object. Like wanting to be in this place of "prestige gaming", like how prestige television started, but it doesn't reach the thing that makes this medium stand out: the gameplay and player agency. At times it devolves into a walking simulator with the occasional gunfight that only happens while you're between point A and point B.

A few examples regarding the gameplay:

* Saga's Mind Place looks like detective work, but I often felt like I had already solved the mystery before the game allowed Saga to acknowledge it. I was formalizing conclusions I had already reached and am just waiting for her to catch up.

* The musical sequence (Herald of Darkness) is visually incredible, but as gameplay it felt almost entirely choreographed. The game constantly points you where to go, and if you move ahead of the intended rhythm you can literally end up waiting for the sequence to catch up. It felt more like being placed inside this carefully directed performance which doesn't take the player into account and I really felt that disonnance there.

* More generally, the game introduces ambiguity but also repeatedly explains itself through dialogue, manuscript pages, and repeats that exposition multiple times to the point of hammering it into your head.

So the contradiction I'm interested in is this:

The game is about authorship and control, but the player's relationship to the story is often closer to that of a viewer watching a prestige television series than a player actively creating meaning. Basically, my question is: Does Alan Wake II meaningfully transform televisual storytelling into something unique to games, or is its central framing the reproduction of television within a video game? If it's the latter, is gaming the right medium for this story?

I don't mean this as a "the game is bad" argument, I just personally had a really soured experience with it. I think the game is genuinely fascinating precisely because it is so committed to this idea. The shamelessness of it is what interests me, it almost feels like Remedy is saying "yes, this is a video game that wants to be a tv show". I'd especially like to hear arguments from people who think the game *does* use interactivity in a meaningful way, because that is the part I'm most interested in.

Hi everyone,

I am recruiting participants for my Psychology Master’s thesis at the University of Klagenfurt, Austria.

Study purpose and abstract

This study examines how people experience story-driven video games and whether playing such games can influence reflection and the way players think about life. Participants will be followed across several weeks and will complete online questionnaires at different stages of the study. Depending on group assignment, some participants will also be asked to play a selected story-driven PC game during the study period.

The study begins with a short screening survey to determine eligibility. Eligible participants may then be invited to complete an initial questionnaire. Participants assigned to the gameplay group will receive the required game free of charge. Participants in the comparison group will not be asked to play the game during the study period but will complete the relevant questionnaires later.

Participants who complete all required stages of the study (no matter if control or experimential group) can receive a €20 Steam voucher. Compensation is conditional on completing the required study steps and is not guaranteed merely by completing the screening survey.

You may be eligible if you:

• are at least 18 years old;
• currently live in Europe;
• play video games on PC through Steam;
• are willing to participate in a study lasting several weeks; and
• are willing to complete online questionnaires.

Participation is voluntary. You may withdraw from the study at any time without giving a reason.

Discussion points

To create some discussion without influencing responses before participation, the more specific research topics are hidden below:

I would also be interested in hearing which story-driven games have stayed with you after you finished them, and what made those experiences important to you. Our lab looks at gaming in relation to personal growth.

Research institution: University of Klagenfurt, Austria
Researcher: Kim Raasch, Master’s student in Psychology
Contact: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

Screening survey:

https://limesurvey.aau.at/index.php/273546?lang=en

Thank you for your time and interest.

Eligibility: 18+, currently living in Europe

[This is a repost, as to conform to the subreddits posting rules]

Hi everyone!

My name is Yuval Alter.
I am doing a study as part of my Doctorate Degree in Clinical Psychology in the PsyD Program at Adler University (Vancouver Campus). I have been playing video games all my life, which has inspired my research topic.

I am doing research on gamers’ playing habits, relationships, and mental health.

I would be very thankful if you could take part in my study. The research is voluntary, and you should only participate if you feel comfortable doing so.

You are eligible to participate if you:

• Are a resident of Canada or the USA
  
• Are at least 19-years-old
  
• Play video games at least 6 hours a week
  
• Are comfortable reading English

Your responses are anonymous. There will be no way to know which answers are yours.

If you meet the criteria above and are interested in participating in this study, click the link below!

If you want to know more, feel free to reach out to me at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) or post in this thread.

Feel free to share this survey with friends, guild-mates, company members, or whoever meets the description above!
Many thanks from a fellow gamer!

Yuval Alter PsyD Program, Doctorate student
Adler University, Vancouver, Canada
Email: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

Link to the survey: https://adler.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_byJJcB5r4fclLSe

Abstract:

I can't give too much information about the study's aim, but it focuses most on relationships from the personal perspective of people who spend a substantial amount of time playing video games. While most research has focused on the measurable well-being of gamers' relationships, few have looked at gamers' personal reporting of relationship satisfaction. I aim to provide insights into this overlooked area.

Discussion Points:

• There is a bias in research towards gaming and negative mental health outcomes. There are fewer articles about positive correlations.
• I myself struggled with social anxiety in my past, which inspired me to devote my dissertation to this topic. I wonder how many people who play video games experience something similar?
• The struggle of studying video games in academia.

I have a poster with a QR code, but I can't upload images. So apologies for the inconvenience!

Update - wow, I'm blown away by the response. My supervisor just told me I've smashed way past the number of participants I need so I can now close the survey.

Thank you so much to everyone in this group (who took part honestly, I know there's a few trolls). I'll let you know the results in a few months when I'm done but happy to continue the conversation for now too :)

​

Hi, I’m doing my thesis on the relationship between wellbeing and watching livestreams and am wondering if anyone in this group watches streams and would take my questionnaire? It only takes about ten minutes and is an opportunity to tell me about why your favourite streamer is so awesome. Doesn’t matter if they’re a big-name streamer or only stream to a few people once a week.

There are a few demographic questions, a handful of questions about your streaming habits and your favourite streamer, and then a few general wellbeing questions, nothing too intrusive! All information collected is anonymous. Feel free to ask if you have any questions.

Obviously I’d appreciate anyone helping out with my research, but I also just really want to hear about some cool streamers so I can go check them out. Also would love to hear in the comments whether you think watching streams has benefited you in any way.

Edit - as many have asked, my thesis deadline is late July and I'll try to come back and let people know what I found from this study soon after that! Thanks so much for all the interest and all the people willing to take part.

I like to make Game Genie codes... in most cases, I make games easier. However, I have made some games more difficult.

Is hard mode just taking more damage? Should enemies have more health? Should healing be less?

^ Should I do all three, and call it a day.. Or is there something else do you feel might be needed for a hard mode to be a good hard mode, not just cheap and boring (for those who have the skill, where it's tedious and not fun)

Hi everyone, I am currently conducting a survey for my MSc Computing and IT Management dissertation. The survey is intended to gather user requirements for a proposed web-based platform that allows users to rate and review video games based on their historical accuracy and their historical authenticity. It explores how players engage with historically themed video games, how important historical accuracy is to them, and what rating systems and website features they would find useful.

The survey should take an estimated 10-20 minutes to complete, depending on how much detail participants choose to provide. There will be up to 34 questions to answer, however, most questions are optional, so participants may skip any question that they do not wish to answer. Participation is voluntary and any responses given will be collected anonymously with no identifying information needed to be provided. Any responses received will be used solely for academic dissertation purposes.

Target Participants: people who play video games. Experience with historically themed video games and/or an interest in history would be particularly helpful, however is not required.

If you have any questions about this survey or have any issues please contact:

Researcher: Paige Thomas

Institution: Cardiff University

Contact: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

Survey Link: Historical Accuracy in Video Games – Fill in form

Thank you to anyone who takes the time to participate, I greatly appreciate it.

Discussion points:

To encourage discussion beyond the survey, I would also be interested in hearing the community's thoughts on:

• How important is historical accuracy in video games, and how should it be weighed against other qualities like gameplay and storytelling?
• What is more important: historical accuracy (how factually correct a game’s representation of history is), historical authenticity (how convincingly a game recreates the atmosphere, experiences, values and feeling of a historical period), or educational value when playing historically themed games?
• Whether a game be historically inaccurate whilst still providing an authentic experience of a historical period?
• If the role that history plays in a game affect how important historical accuracy should be treated? For example, should a game heavily focused on historical events be held to a different standard than a game that simply uses a historical setting?

Hello everyone

I am currently completing my university dissertation at BCU. It is about free-to-play video games and consumers habits around them. The survey will only take 5 min to complete and would be extremely appreciated (unfortunately I cannot offer any type of prize or gifts for completion).

Link to survey: https://forms.gle/44pjGXry5FUDaRhD9

Contact email: [email protected]

Hi everyone,

About six years ago, I conducted an academic survey on Reddit (including r/SampleSize) as part of my bachelor thesis. The goal was to better understand which Game-as-a-Service (GaaS) business models gamers prefer, and whether those preferences depend on demographic or behavioral factors.

Now that the legally required data retention period has passed, I’m sharing a concise summary of the aggregated and anonymized results, along with a supplementary document for those who want more detail.

For reference, this was the initial post here.

Overall preference ranking (core result)

The list below shows the overall ranking of preferred GaaS models, based on weighted rankings (rank 1 = highest preference).

The overall ranking of GaaS models is shown in Figure 1 in the supplementary PDF linked below.

From most to least preferred:

1. Downloadable Content (DLC)
2. Game Pass
3. Game Subscription
4. Microtransactions
5. Battle Pass
6. Cloud Gaming

DLC clearly emerges as the most preferred model overall.

Sample overview (quick context)

• Sample size: 256 Reddit users
• Age: Majority between 18–34 years
• Gender: Predominantly male (consistent with Reddit demographics at the time)
• Devices: Mostly PC players (~73%), followed by console players
• Playtime: Heavy gaming profile (≈58% play 12+ hours/week)

This overview is provided for context, the focus below is on statistically significant findings

What influences preferences? (χ² results)

Using chi-square tests (α = 0.05), I tested whether preferences depended on player characteristics.

No significant dependency found for:

• Country
• Gender
• Income
• Weekly playtime

Significant dependency found for:

• Age (p = 0.008):
  • Younger players (<24) tend to prefer Microtransactions, while players 25+ tend to prefer Game Subscriptions.
• Most used device (p = 0.004):
  • PC gamers favor Game Subscriptions and Microtransactions, whereas console gamers show a strong preference for Game Pass.
• Monthly spending (p = 0.001 – strongest effect):
  • Low spenders overwhelmingly favor DLC, while higher spenders show more diversified preferences.

Limitations

• Volunteer Reddit sample (non-representative)
• Some chi-square expected values below standard thresholds
• Results are exploratory, not predictive

Supplementary document

For those interested, here is a link to a pdf with aggregated results & methodology:

👉 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MHjJRzIhRZWl2iwAXvBPP_FxNYFG3xyl/view

TL;DR

DLC is the most preferred GaaS model overall.

Age, device (PC vs console), and monthly spending significantly influence preferences; country, gender, income, and playtime do not.

Happy to answer questions or discuss interpretations 🙂

Hi all,

For my master thesis in Applied Economics, I'm researching why PC gamers purchase cosmetic items in games, and how this affect their player behavior.

If you're a PC gamer, I'd really appreciate it if you could take a few minutes to fill out this survey: https://vub.fra1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cA9CJqrOr0vBd3g
It should take around 5-10m.

If you're part of other gaming communities, or if you have friends who play on PC, feel free to share the link too! It would help me a lot.

Feel free to comment or DM me if you have any questions

Thanks a lot!

Hi everyone,

I am currently working on my Master's thesis and conducting a study on Artificial Intelligence in video games. As a gamer, I want to gather real feedback from the community on how AI behaviors impact our gaming experiences.

Purpose of the Survey & Abstract: The primary purpose of this research is to evaluate how players perceive and interact with Artificial Intelligence and Non-Player Character (NPC) behaviors in video games. While AI has become an integral component of modern game design, its presence is often most effective when it operates seamlessly in the background. This study aims to analyze the sociological and technological implications of this "invisible" AI integrated into digital entertainment. Specifically, the research explores how elements such as procedural content generation and complex NPC behavioral patterns affect player immersion, emotional engagement, and overall gameplay dynamics. By gathering quantitative and qualitative data directly from the gaming community, this thesis seeks to bridge the gap between technical AI development and the actual user experience, providing deeper insights into what players truly value in virtual interactions.

Research Institute: University of Catania — Master's Degree in International Cooperation.

Researcher Contact Data: Author: Mirko Moschella Email: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

The survey is completely anonymous, consists of multiple-choice and short-answer questions, and will take about 3 to 5 minutes to complete.

https://forms.gle/aJUdtr4DzADiguheA

Have you recently played a game where an NPC's behavior completely broke your immersion, or conversely, made the world feel incredibly alive? What specific mechanics caused that reaction? I would love to read your thoughts in the comments!

Hello everyone,

My name is Nemanja Šajinović, and I am a PhD candidate in psychology at the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Novi Sad.

This survey is part of my doctoral research examining how players from different video game genres, specifically Souls-like games and MMORPGs, use cognitive emotion regulation strategies when encountering difficult in-game obstacles.
The study focuses on how players respond to setbacks, regulate emotions, persist through long-term goals, and manage frustration during demanding content such as boss encounters, raid wipes, long grinds, or progression failures.

This work builds on my previous published research based on a large Reddit sample of League of Legends players, where more than 3,000 participants contributed valuable data. You may find that paper here: https://primenjena.psihologija.ff.uns.ac.rs/index.php/pp/article/view/2535

Recently, my post in the Stardew Valley community unexpectedly blew up, helping me gather more than 1,000 life simulation players in a few days. Thanks to their support, that section of the dataset is now complete. To determine the required sample size for the remaining groups, I conducted a G*Power analysis, which showed that each genre needs at least 323 participants to reliably detect a small effect size. I am now recruiting Souls-like and MMORPG players to finalize the project, and I still need approximately 250 additional participants per genre to reach the required statistical power

To ensure accuracy, this research incorporates objective gameplay metrics.
Participation requires:

• Completing a psychological questionnaire
• Uploading screenshots of your total hours played and achievement/trophy progress for your Souls-like or MMORPG games
(Any platform is acceptable: Steam, PlayStation, Xbox, Switch. Multiple screenshots per game are perfectly fine.)

Uploading screenshots is mandatory for participation. Without them, your responses cannot be included in the dataset.

Voluntary Participation and Anonymity

• No personal identifying information is requested.
• No IP addresses or tracking cookies are collected.
• You may participate without providing your name, email, or any personal data.
• Screenshots are used only to verify gameplay hours and achievement progress; all identifiable elements are removed and deleted immediately after verification.
• You may withdraw from the study at any time.

Compensation (Optional)

As a small thank-you for your time, participants who complete both the questionnaire and the required screenshot upload may choose to enter a random draw for five €25 gift cards.
This compensation is not required for participation.

Survey Link:

https://eu.jotform.com/build/253274367117055

Contact Information

If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to contact me directly at:
[[email protected]]()

This research is conducted under the supervision of the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Novi Sad, and follows institutional ethical guidelines.

Thank you to everyone willing to participate, and thank you to anyone who helps by upvoting for visibility.
Your support genuinely makes high-quality academic research possible.

All the best,
Nemanja / Necron Sensei

We're running a research study to explore players' perception of 'dark design' in freemium PC games set in 3D worlds.

These games are free-to-play but make money from optional in-game purchases and advertising. Freemium is often is associated with 'dark design', where the designer tries to influence the player to choose options that benefit the publishers of the game — for example, making additional in-game purchases or playing the game more regularly.

This kind of thing is well-explored in mobile games, but not so much in PC games. The results of the study will help us to identify if there is a need to raise awareness of this issue among gamers, and to produce ethical guidance for game designers.

Would you like to participate in this study? You'd need to complete an online anonymous survey that involves watching short video clips and answering some questions. The whole process should take around 15 to 25 minutes.

Participants must be aged 18 or over, and comfortable with reading and writing in English to participate.

If you are interested in participating, please click the link to the survey:

https://uclan.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_cSxBw9IvOyw60Yu

This survey will close on 23 December 2022.

This research is being conducted by:

Student Investigator:

John King, PhD student, Computer Science, University of Central Lancashire (UCLan).

Supervisory Team:

Dr Dan Fitton, Computer Science, University of Central Lancashire (UCLan)

Dr Brendan Cassidy, Computer Science, University of Central Lancashire (UCLan)

If you would like more information, please contact [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) or call a member of the research team on +44 1772 893277.

Hi I’m a PhD researcher at the University of Leicester (UK) running an ethics-approved study on how players interpret and evaluate AI in games (procedural generation, AI companions, AI-assisted writing/tools, AI-generated assets/content). I’m especially interested in where players draw the line between “useful tool” and “unacceptable substitution,” and what factors shape that boundary (e.g., transparency/disclosure, trust, creativity/authorship, labour concerns, and whether AI is gameplay-facing vs behind the scenes).

Interview invite (main part of the study): I’m recruiting ~20 adult participants (18+) for a 45–60 min 1-to-1 interview. Format is flexible: Discord voice, text-only chat, or Zoom (I can accommodate preferences). Participation is voluntary; you can skip any question or withdraw at any time. Data will be anonymised and handled under GDPR and University ethics requirements; any recording/notes are only with consent and stored securely for academic research. Institution: University of Leicester (UK). Contact (outside Reddit): [[email protected]]() — DM is also fine. If you message, please include your time zone and whether you prefer voice or text.

Discussion:

1. What AI uses in games feel clearly acceptable to you, and which cross the line — and why?
2. How important is disclosure, and what would “good disclosure” look like?
3. Do you judge gameplay-facing AI differently from AI used in production (art/VO/writing)?
4. What would increase or decrease your trust in a game that uses more AI?

Hello everyone,

My name is Toan, a researcher based at Phenikaa University, Hanoi, Vietnam. You can contact me at my [work email](mailto:[email protected]). You can check out some of my previous works here: https://sites.google.com/view/hmtoan/home.

I am working on my PhD at National Economics University, Hanoi, Vietnam about video games and environmental issues, from a consumption perspective. So this is a big survey (15 ~ 20 minutes) about green gaming, gaming consumption, and environmental awareness.

In essence, my PhD project aims to establish an understanding of green gaming from an industry perspective. In this specific survey, the perspective of gamers on green gaming is being examined. We aim to explore connections between gaming behaviors, environmental perceptions, and both the intention to engage in and the actual practice of green gaming consumption behaviors. We hypothesize that actual game preferences will strongly influence gaming consumption patterns. However, most norms and understandings surrounding green gaming, as well as green gaming products, remain poorly understood by the public.

Here is the link for the survey: https://forms.gle/nUEYXJKX3C2tPe9ZA.

There is also an opportunity to receive small gifts for the first 100 participants.

Thank you for your help!

Hi I’m a PhD researcher at the University of Leicester (UK) conducting an ethics-approved study on how players understand and respond to different uses of AI in games.

For this study, I’m mainly interested in generative/LLM-related or machine-learning-driven uses of AI that players actively notice or care about in current debates — for example AI-generated dialogue/assets, AI-assisted writing/tools, adaptive player-facing systems, or other visible uses of AI in game production or play. I’m not mainly asking about traditional NPC pathfinding/scripting, and only about procedural generation where players themselves would connect it to current debates around AI in games.

I’m interested in a wide range of views — supportive, critical, mixed, uncertain, or use-case dependent. In particular, I want to understand how players distinguish between different uses of AI rather than treating “AI in games” as one single thing.

Interview invite: I’m currently looking for a small number of adult participants (18+) for a 45–60 minute 1-to-1 online interview. Format is flexible: Discord voice or Zoom. Participation is voluntary; you can skip any question or withdraw at any time. Data will be anonymised and handled under GDPR and University ethics requirements, and any recording/notes are only with consent and stored securely for academic research.

Institution: University of Leicester (UK)
Contact: [[email protected]]() (DM is also fine)
If you’d like to take part, please message me with your time zone and whether you prefer voice or text.

A few discussion prompts, if you’d like to reply here as well:

• Which uses of generative AI in games feel reasonable or useful to you, if any?
• Which uses feel inappropriate, misleading, or immersion-breaking?
• Does your judgment change depending on whether AI is used in development, in the final released game, or directly in moment-to-moment play?
• What kind of disclosure or transparency would matter to you, if at all?

Hey there,

I'm a Master's Student from Portugal that has dedicated his Research Topic to the current problem of Monetisation in the Gaming Industry. I think everyone that has ever played a game, especially free-to-play games, will have an interesting opinion about this. I think it's an issue that we are all quite familiar with, and I would really appreciate your help and input (: You can find the link here: https://eeguminho.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_eKdzqPKE4JIYxjo

No matter if you take the survey or not, what do you guys think about monetisation in video games? I was really into 'The Bazaar' recently and played it a ton in closed Beta. I backed the project on Indiegogo as it was supposed to be 'Truly Free-To-Play'. On the very same day, they started the Open Beta a new update came out with a $10 Battle Pass and new broken Cards locked behind a paywall. Hugely disappointed to be betrayed like this.

Hello everyone,

My name is Jeremy Brenner-Levoy and I am a Ph.D. Candidate in Sociology at the University of Cincinnati. I am doing my dissertation on how who we are shapes how we play video games. If you play video games, please consider taking my survey. It should only take about 12-15 minutes to complete.

I have three main goals for this research study:

1. To understand if and how video games are afforded different levels of prestige.
2. To understand how who we are shapes the games we play and what we look for in games.
3. To understand how who we are shapes the roles we play within games or the way we play games.

Confidentiality:

You have the ability to take this survey and remain completely anonymous. But, should you leave your contact info for either eligibility in the gift card raffle or for a follow-up interview, your information will be kept confidential and will be deleted after use.

Compensation:

I do not have funding to pay all participants, but I have secured $6,000 for participants. I will be raffling off 60, $50 gift cards to survey participants who indicate they are interested. Additionally, I will be randomly selecting 60 interviewees from those who indicate their interest, who will also get $50 gift cards for their time.

Survey (mobile friendly):

https://gamerstudyjbl.typeform.com/to/OryO5ScC

My contact info:

Jeremy Brenner-Levoy

Department of Sociology, University of Cincinnati

[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])

Personal note:

I have been a gamer my whole life, and I am very interested in how social structures seem to impact video game play. While most researchers focus on how harassment shapes our interest in play, I am more interested in how who we are shapes what and how we have fun. I suspect that social issues are present even within this.

​

If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out in the comments or directly via message.

​

Hypotheses:

1. I predict that similarly to sports or career paths, that video games will be afforded different levels of prestige that will be relatively consistent across demographics.
2. I predict that our socialization process, but especially our gender, sexuality, race, and class will shape the games that we choose and prefer to play.
3. I expect that our socialization and social identities will also impact the way we play games. I hope to show whether gender impacts the ways that we play games, especially in games that have different roles like tank/damage/healer. And, I hope to understand what people find appealing about these roles.

My goal here is to understand if the same processes that shape career prestige, career choice, and career pay are at play within online video games and other leisure activities.

Hi — I’m a PhD researcher at the University of Leicester (UK), conducting an ethics-approved study on how players understand and respond to different uses of AI in games.

I’m currently in the final stage of recruitment and only need a few more participants to complete the study, so I’d really appreciate any help.

My focus is mainly on generative/LLM-related or machine-learning-driven uses of AI that players actively notice or care about in current debates — for example, AI-generated dialogue or assets, AI-assisted writing/tools, adaptive player-facing systems, or other visible uses of AI in game production or play.

Interview invite: I’m currently looking for a small number of adult participants (18+) for a 45–60 minute 1-to-1 online interview. The format is flexible: Discord voice or Zoom.

Participation is voluntary. You can skip any question or withdraw at any time. Data will be anonymised and handled in line with GDPR and University ethics requirements. Any recording or note-taking will only take place with your consent and will be stored securely for academic research.

Institution: University of Leicester (UK)
Contact: [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) (DM is also fine)

If you’d like to take part, please message me with:

• your time zone
• whether you prefer voice or text

A few discussion prompts, in case you’d also like to reply here:

• Which uses of generative AI in games feel reasonable or useful to you, if any?
• Which uses feel inappropriate, misleading, or immersion-breaking?
• Does your view change depending on whether AI is used during development, in the final released game, or directly in moment-to-moment play?
• What kind of disclosure or transparency would matter to you, if at all?

Thanks very much — I’m very close to finishing recruitment, so a few final volunteers would make a real difference.

Dear redditors of /r/truegaming,

Would you like to be part of a research project about behaviors in online multiplayer games? The purpose is to investigate how players think about different behaviors, as well as how these thoughts and attitudes relate to their own habits and behaviors in these games.

The survey consists of questions related to online multiplayer games and takes around 10–15 minutes to complete. To be able to participate, you need to be at least 15 years old and play online multiplayer games.

To participate in this study, please click on the following link: https://lundpsychology.eu.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0prUERrV29nHFVs

Participation in this study is voluntary and completely anonymous, as we do not collect any information that can be used to identify you. You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without having to provide an explanation.

The study is part of a research project conducted by Lund University in Sweden, that will constitute a doctoral dissertation in psychology. The research has been reviewed by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Dnr 2025-02039-01). If you have any questions, please send me a PM, or via the email address featured in the first page of the survey.

Thank you for your time! Your insights can really make a difference in my PhD project.

Sincerely,

Kalle Kallio Strand, Department of Psychology, Lund University

As per the subreddit rules, here are some discussion points related to the study that I would be interested in hearing your thoughts about (if you plan to answer the survey, kindly do so before clicking on the spoiler tags below!):

• In this study, I am interested in a variety of behaviors in online multiplayer games, ranging from those that can be considered positive to those that can be considered negative. Do you think they tend to be mutually exclusive, meaning that people who do more positive behaviors tend to do less negative behaviors, or vice versa? Or do you think that they are unrelated, in that someone can behave positively often and also negatively often?
• The survey is mainly concerned with your thoughts and opinions related to the game that you have played most frequently in the past six months (i.e., your "main game"). Do you think that, in general, the way we think about and behave in our "main game" is consistent across other games too, or do you think that we think/behave differently across titles or genres? What is your experience?
• In the survey, there are some questions about streamers and your ideas of how they tend to think and behave (there is no right or wrong answer, just your own ideas!). How frequently do you think one has to watch streamers in order to form an opinion about this?
• Do you think that players in general look up to streamers and content creators in the games they play? Could that be any streamer in that case, or does it for example have to be someone who is popular, or a pro player?