“That’s so unfair!” is one of the last phrases you want to say as a player and among the worst feedback to hear as a game developer. While it might sound like a throwaway comment in passing (gamers know these well), it actually signals a deeper problem—the player doesn’t feel that the game’s system is trustworthy and that the game has its own agenda that doesn’t serve the player.
But this isn’t to say it’s because of corrupt code or malicious intentions. Sometimes, it’s the cues players judge fairness on in the moment. It’s not so much about rules or logic but how they feel right then and there. If a player experiences outcomes that don’t seem to rely on a cause-and-effect relationship or has no idea why something happened, fairness will seem like wishful thinking. For gamers, it could mean moving on to the next best thing to prevent that outcome from happening again.
As fairness is clearly an evolving challenge for game designers, we’ll explore it by looking at three areas where fairness is a struggle in modern gaming. We’ll also point out the lessons these examples offer for better game design in traditional and real-money gaming environments.
PvP – Skill vs. System
PvP is all about competing directly against other human players, and this in itself makes the interplay between skill, design, and perception especially intricate. With player versus AI scenarios, outcomes result from predictable systems, but PvP hinges on unpredictable human behavior. Shooters, fighting games, and MOBAs are all genres where these dynamics are prevalent, with design choices like frame data, weapon tuning, map layouts, and character balance all playing a part.
Because of all these moving parts, developers frequently release new patches to adjust or rework game mechanics or rebalance weapons or abilities. Yet if the matchmaking system doesn’t match players by skill level well enough, none of these underlying tweaks will feel fair in practice. Even well-balanced games can still produce skewed matches if human skill gaps are too wide or progression systems reward those who play a lot but not necessarily well.
A fair PvP system needs to earn player trust not just through the updates and monitoring process, but by paying attention to the rules, feedback, and matchmaking. When players know why they won or lost and have clear guidance for improvement, they’re more likely to accept the outcome and keep playing.
Main takeaway: The goal isn’t to eliminate imbalance completely. It’s about maintaining a system that’s skill-driven and responsive. Players don’t simply always want to win; rather, they want to trust that a defeat was because of a misplay and not because they were set up to fail.
RNG – Excitement vs. Exploitation
Randomness and random number generators (RNG) have become increasingly pervasive in modern games, driven mostly by the new progression systems in live-service and mobile games and the need to boost retention and replayability. On the flip side, however, they’re also one of the most dangerous tools in game design. Some examples of randomness include loot drops in Destiny and Diablo and gacha pulls in Genshin Impact, which are huge draws within the games. The problem is that when randomness feels almost too random, and possibly even manipulative or shady, players will feel like it’s a rigged system.
- Because developers are eager to keep players engaged, the line between engagement and exploitation can become blurred.
- Drawing that line more clearly depends on how much clarity and control developers are willing to give players.
- Players are less likely to commit to games that lack transparency in system design.
- Even when randomness is involved, players want to understand what’s at stake.
- As players become more design-savvy, more games now:
- Display probabilities and drop rates
- Share other key metrics to provide reassurance
- Some games offer opt-in randomness via features like:
- Optional loot chests
- Reroll tokens
- These allow players to choose whether or not to take a risk.
Giving players a perceived sense of agency also matters. Darkest Dungeon, for instance, uses an RNG to handle everything from stress reactions to combat accuracy. Players simply view unpredictability as a part of the game and the grueling and punishing survival theme. Having randomness naturally integrated into the program rather than having it be unavoidable or predatory can shift it from chance-driven moments to hidden traps.
Main takeaway: Randomness is a powerful tool, but only when designed with player agency and transparency in mind. Don’t make RNGs feel exploitative.
Real-Money Gaming – Fairness in Monetized Play
Video games have been increasingly mirroring aspects of gambling for two reasons: effectiveness and perceived fun. But because gambling is often based around real money, casino games have to be regulated for safety and fairness. Look at Canada, for example. Through iGaming Ontario, a government agency, Ontario became the first Canadian province in the country to launch a regulated, open online gaming market in April 2022. This framework introduced strict licensing and auditing requirements for private operators, aimed at protecting players and ensuring fair play.
Due to this initiative, the tightly regulated real-money sites must openly disclose odds and payout percentages, make consumer protection laws known, and provide player protection tools like spending limits and self-exclusion tools. It’s a level of oversight that helps players build real trust with operators in the industry. In contrast, traditional game systems might use RNGs that impact everything from competitive balance or progression, without any formal oversight. With no auditing or disclosure, players are left wondering if the system has other hidden parameters.
That’s exactly why debates around the ethics of video game mechanics like these are making headlines. If game companies were held to similar standards for these features as regulated gambling, would it fundamentally change how games are designed? More and more gambling mechanics are being integrated into everyday games, but developers aren’t held to the same standards as gambling operators. Even without regulation, adding a formal layer of accountability and transparency would go a long way toward player trust.
Main takeaway: Regulated gambling platforms show how transparency and player protections can foster trust. With game systems adopting gambling mechanics without oversight, there’s a prime opportunity to rethink that accountability.
The Cost of an Unfair System
If players feel or even just sense that the odds are completely stacked against them, they’ll push back. After decades of exposure to vague gaming structures, people have become much more attuned to manipulative systems and mechanics, which means they won’t hesitate to call out questionable design. We’ve seen these infamous examples everywhere—items and characters locked behind paywalls, players blindsided by sudden patch changes, and drastic balance shifts.
Be it a calculated decision or more of a chipping away at the goodwill of fans, it costs game developers fan trust and, in worst-case scenarios, serious backlash. Once the feeling of fairness is stripped away, it’s hard for the game companies to regain player confidence.
Investing in Fairness as a Design Philosophy
When designers and game companies prioritize transparency and meaningful agency, they create fair experiences from the get-go. With fair experiences come long-term trust, and only then does an ongoing commitment to balance and respect have real weight. Even when the math checks out, how players perceive those systems matters, and a system that feels fair is just as important as one that’s fair on paper.
