Background. As video game usage continues to rise, it is important to understand why people choose and continue playing a game.
Purpose. This research presents a theoretical framework to explore the relationships between gameplay motivations, satisfaction, continuance intention and gameplay.
Methods. To examine these relationships, survey data was collected from 353 participants who played different types of online games, including League of Legends, World of Warcraft, Overwatch, and Hearthstone, for at least 10 hours in the past three months. A series of structural equation models were tested to identify the model with the best validity and fit. All constructs were from previously validated measures. Motivations were measured by the Trojan Player Typology, which assessed story-driven, completionist, competitor, escapist, smarty-pants, and socializer motives. Satisfaction was measured using the game user experience satisfaction scale (GUESS), which assessed satisfaction with usability/playability, narratives, play engrossment, enjoyment, creative freedom, audio aesthetic, personal gratification, social connectivity, and visual aesthetics. Continuance intention was measured using a 4-item scale.
Results. The final model suggested that motivations were positively related to satisfaction, while satisfaction was positively related to continuance intention and weekly play time. Motivations accounted for 20% of the variance in satisfaction, and the story-driven motivation was the strongest predictor. Further, satisfaction accounted for 47% of the variance in continuance intention and 8% of the variance in weekly play time.
Conclusion. Individual differences in gameplay motivation are an important component of a player’s satisfaction. Further, satisfaction appears to be central to a player’s intention to continue using a game.
AlbertW.TullisT. (2013). Measuring the user experience: Collecting, analyzing, and presenting usability metrics. Morgan Kaufmann.
2.
AndersonR. E.SrinivasanS. S. (2003). E-satisfaction and e-loyalty: A contingency framework. Psychology & Marketing, 20(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.10063
3.
BartleR. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research, 1(1), 19.
4.
BhattacherjeeA. (2001). An empirical analysis of the antecedents of electronic commerce service continuance. Decision Support Systems, 32(2), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(01)00111-7
5.
BillieuxJ.Van der LindenM.AchabS.KhazaalY.ParaskevopoulosL.ZullinoD.ThorensG. (2013). Why do you play World of Warcraft? An in-depth exploration of self-reported motivations to play online and in-game behaviours in the virtual world of Azeroth. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.021
BostanB.CatakG. (2016). Explorations in player motivations: Gamer profiles. In BostanB. (Ed.), Gamer psychology and behavior (pp. 137–153). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29904-4_9
10.
BrownE.CairnsP. (2004). A grounded investigation of game immersion. In Extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (CHI’04) (pp. 1297–1300). ACM. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/985921.986048
11.
ChangI.-C.LiuC.-C.ChenK. (2014). The effects of hedonic/utilitarian expectations and social influence on continuance intention to play online games. Internet Research, 24(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-02-2012-0025
12.
ChoiD.KimJ. (2004). Why people continue to play online games: In search of critical design factors to increase customer loyalty to online contents. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7(1), 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493104322820066
CruzC.HanusM. D.FoxJ. (2017). The need to achieve: Players’ perceptions and uses of extrinsic meta-game reward systems for video game consoles. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 516–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.017
15.
CsikszentmihalyiM.CsikszentmihalyiI. S. (1992). Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge University Press.
16.
DavisF. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: Theory and results [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
17.
DavisF. D.BagozziR. P.WarshawP. R. (1992). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use computers in the workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111–1132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb00945.x
18.
DemetrovicsZ.UrbánR.NagygyörgyK.FarkasJ.ZilahyD.MervóB.. . .HarmathE. (2011). Why do you play? The development of the motives for online gaming questionnaire (MOGQ). Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 814–825. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0091-y
FinneyS. J.DiStefanoC. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In GregoryR. H.RalphO. M. (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (Vol. 10, pp. 269–314). Information Age Publishing.
21.
FornellC.LarckerD. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
22.
GhazaliE.MutumD. S.WoonM.-Y. (2018). Exploring player behavior and motivations to continue playing Pokémon GO. Information Technology & People, 32(3), 646–667. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-07-2017-0216
23.
GreenbergB. S.SherryJ.LachlanK.LucasK.HolmstromA. (2010). Orientations to video games among gender and age groups. Simulation & Gaming, 41(2), 238–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878108319930
24.
HairJ.BlackW. C.BabinB. J.AndersonR. E.TathamR. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall.
25.
HairJ.SarstedtM.HopkinsL. G.KuppelwieserV. (2014). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research. European Business Review, 26(2), 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-10-2013-0128
HilgardJ.EngelhardtC. R.BartholowB. D. (2013). Individual differences in motives, preferences, and pathology in video games: The gaming attitudes, motives, and experiences scales (GAMES). Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 608. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00608
28.
HooperD.CoughlanJ.MullenM. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53–60.
29.
HsiaoC. C.ChiouJ. S. (2017). The social influence of online collaborative community: the moderating effect of achievement. Behaviour & Information Technology, 36(3), 269–280.
30.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
31.
HuangH.-C.HuangL.-S.ChouY.-J.TengC.-I. (2017). Influence of temperament and character on online gamer loyalty: Perspectives from personality and flow theories. Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 398–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.009
32.
KahnA. S.ShenC.LuL.RatanR. A.CoaryS.HouJ.. . . WilliamsD. (2015). The Trojan player typology: A cross-genre, cross-cultural, behaviorally validated scale of video game play motivations. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 354–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.018
33.
KayaliF.LucknerN.PurgathoferP.SpielK.FitzpatrickG. (2018). Design considerations towards long-term engagement in games for health. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on the foundations of digital games (pp. 351–358). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3235765.3235789
KlugG. C.SchellJ. (2006). Why people play games: An industry perspective. In VordererP.BryantJ. (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences (pp. 91–100). Routledge.
36.
LeeM.-C.TsaiT.-R. (2010). What drives people to continue to play online games? An extension of technology model and theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 26(6), 601–620. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447311003781318
37.
LiH.LiuY.XuX.HeikkiläJ.Van Der HeijdenH. (2015). Modeling hedonic is continuance through the uses and gratifications theory: An empirical study in online games. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.053
38.
LiangT.-P.YehY.-H. (2011). Effect of use contexts on the continuous use of mobile services: The case of mobile games. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 15(2), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-010-0300-1
39.
LiaoG.-Y.HuangH.-C.TengC.-I. (2016). When does frustration not reduce continuance intention of online gamers? The expectancy disconfirmation perspective. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 17(1), 65.
40.
MaloneT. W.LepperM. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction, 3, 223–253.
41.
MerikiviJ.TuunainenV.NguyenD. (2017). What makes continued mobile gaming enjoyable?Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.070
42.
NeysJ. L. D.JanszJ.TanE. S. H. (2014). Exploring persistence in gaming: The role of self-determination and social identity. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 1961–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.047
PhanM. H.KeeblerJ. R.ChaparroB. S. (2016). The development and validation of the game user experience satisfaction scale (GUESS). Human Factors, 58(8), 1217–1247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816669646
45.
ReichheldF. F.SchefterP. (2000). E-loyalty: Your secret weapon on the web. Harvard Business Review, 78(4), 105–113.
RosengrenK. E. (1974). Uses and gratifications: A paradigm outlined. The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research, 3, 269–286.
48.
RubinA. M. (2009). Uses and gratifications. In NabiR. L.OliverM. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of media processes and effects (pp. 147–158). Sage.
RyanR. M.DeciE. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.68
51.
RyanR. M.RigbyC. S.PrzybylskiA. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4), 344–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8
52.
SailerM.HenseJ. U.MayrS. K.MandlH. (2017). How gamification motivates: An experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 371–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033
53.
ScharkowM.FestlR.VogelgesangJ.QuandtT. (2015). Beyond the “core-gamer”: Genre preferences and gratifications in computer games. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 293–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.020
54.
SchuurmanD.De MoorK.De MarezL.Van LooyJ. (2008, September). Fanboys, competers, escapists and time-killers: A typology based on gamers’ motivations for playing video games [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts. https://doi.org/10.1145/1413634.1413647
55.
SherryJ. L.LucasK.GreenbergB. S.LachlanK. (2006). Video game uses and gratifications as predictors of use and game preference. In VordererP.BryantJ. (Eds.), Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences (pp. 213–224). Routledge.
56.
TengC.-I. (2017). Strengthening loyalty of online gamers: Goal gradient perspective. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 21(1), 128–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/10864415.2016.1204195
57.
TengC.-I.ChenW.-W. (2014). Team participation and online gamer loyalty. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 13(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2013.08.001
58.
TsengF.-M.WangC.-Y. (2013). Why do not satisfied consumers show reuse behavior? The context of online games. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1012–1022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.011
WuJ.-H.WangS.-C.TsaiH.-H. (2010). Falling in love with online games: The uses and gratifications perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1862–1871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.033
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
