Physics-based games allow for users to solve puzzles using their brains and understand gravity, impact, and how things interact with each other. To get an idea of how these games work, I tested two games. Angry Birds was released in 2009 by Rovio Entertainment by Rovio Entertainment and was marketed for younger audiences. Cut The Rope was released in 2010 and was also marketed towards a similar audience. Both of these games became immensely popular on mobile devices for a large range of ages and paved the way for numerous sequels in their respective series.
Both of these games’ usage of real-world physics add a more realistic and pragmatic way of thinking for their players. While both games are still cartoonish and child friendly, they require an understanding of gravity and physics to be completed. In Angry Birds, players launch birds from a catapult in an attempt to kill the pigs and the structures that they are hiding in across the way. In Cut The Rope, the player must cut a number of ropes in order to help a piece of candy reach Om Nom, the green character that has become so popular over the years. Understanding how the candy is suspended by the numerous rupes and how cutting each one will cause it to move makes the player need to think about each and every decision they make. These combinations of thought-provoking problems, simple player mechanics, and childlike aesthetics make these games feel so similar and popular amongst the same audiences.
While extremely similar, the games do have a few key differences. For one, while the games both have simple mechanics, there are more different actions that players of Angry Birds can take. In this game, there are a number of different birds that take different actions when they are in the air and the player taps the screen. Some of them move faster, change angles, split into three, drop an egg, or more, presenting a new challenge of understanding how to use each character type and make the most of their unique abilities. Cut The Rope, however, never strays away from the mechanic of cutting ropes. That being said, while their mechanics differ, both games are still able to create complex puzzles that lead to a skilled player not to be the most dexterous or the most skilled gamer but a someone who can problem solve and use their intuition.
From these games, I’ve learned that puzzle games having simple mechanics are the most complex. A player who plays a puzzle game like this is not usually a hardcore gamer but a casual individual who plays not for the button tapping and physical challenges but the brain teasers that they come across. Understanding the target audience of a game has serious design implications, and both of these games did a great job of understanding who would download and log back in to them.
I remember playing each game as a child and I was surprised to still find myself enjoying them just as much. The bright colors and fun noises make it a fun aesthetic to play at any age, and the increasing difficulty of the levels create a fun and inviting environment for players of all skill levels. It’s no surprise that both of these games have consistently been at the top of the charts for years, and I believe that the combination of simple mechanics and fun aesthetics are a large example for these games’ success.
