A lot of games are designed around removing friction. Movement becomes faster. Failure becomes softer. Resources become plentiful. Objectives become impossible to miss. Characters automatically grab ledges, recover health, identify important objects, and politely solve half the problem before the player has finished working out what the problem was. These decisions can improve accessibility, pacing, and usability. That doesn’t make them bad. The problem begins when removing friction also removes the behaviour that makes the fantasy meaningful.
A detective who’s handed every answer doesn’t feel like a detective. A survivor carrying enough food to open a regional supermarket doesn’t feel like a survivor. A warrior who can’t meaningfully fail doesn’t feel powerful. They feel protected by the script. Every meaningful game contains resistance. The important question isn’t whether the player encounters friction. It’s whether that friction strengthens the fantasy or interrupts it.
What Resistance Actually Does
Resistance gives the player something to push against. It creates the conditions that make preparation, judgement, adaptation, and mastery necessary. Without resistance, actions may still function, but they lose much of their meaning. A locked door makes exploration valuable. Limited ammunition makes accuracy important. A stamina system makes commitment dangerous. Incomplete evidence makes observation necessary. Enemy perception makes timing and positioning matter. The obstacle isn’t separate from the experience. When designed properly, it produces the behaviour the experience needs.
| Type Of Resistance | What It Asks From The Player | Effect On The Experience |
|---|---|---|
| Productive resistance | Think, adapt, practise, interpret, or commit | Reinforces the fantasy |
| Destructive resistance | Guess, repeat, tolerate, or fight the interface | Interrupts the fantasy |
| Meaningful limitation | Make decisions under pressure | Creates responsibility |
| Arbitrary limitation | Accept an unexplained restriction | Weakens trust |
| Readable failure | Understand what went wrong | Produces learning |
| Unreadable failure | Retry without useful information | Produces frustration |
The distinction matters because both types can make a game difficult. Only one makes that difficulty useful.
Insider Tip: Don’t ask whether an obstacle makes the game harder. Ask what behaviour the obstacle makes necessary.
Productive Resistance Reinforces The Role
Productive resistance belongs to the fantasy. It creates tension that makes the player behave like the person, creature, or force they’re supposed to embody. In Hitman, waiting is productive resistance. The player observes routines, studies spaces, identifies disguises, manipulates opportunities, and chooses the right moment to act. Removing that waiting might make the experience faster, but it would also remove a large part of what makes the player feel like a calculating assassin.
In Dark Souls, stamina creates productive resistance because aggression needs restraint. Every attack, dodge, and defensive action carries a cost. The player can’t swing endlessly and hope the enemy eventually wanders into the sharp end. They must read movement, understand timing, and accept vulnerability. A stealth game needs visibility and sound because caution is part of the fantasy. A detective game needs uncertainty because deduction requires something to uncover. A survival game needs scarcity because preparation only matters when the player can’t carry everything.
| Player Fantasy | Productive Resistance | Behaviour It Creates |
|---|---|---|
| Assassin | Patrols, suspicion, timing, restricted spaces | Observation and patience |
| Survivor | Scarce resources, injury, weather, limited shelter | Preparation and adaptation |
| Detective | Incomplete evidence, unreliable testimony, contradiction | Attention and deduction |
| Warrior | Stamina, positioning, commitment, enemy pressure | Timing and mastery |
| Thief | Visibility, noise, locks, escape routes | Caution and improvisation |
| Explorer | Dangerous terrain, uncertain routes, limited supplies | Planning and curiosity |
Good friction doesn’t merely delay success. It gives success a shape the player can understand and feel responsible for producing.
Insider Tip: If removing an obstacle doesn’t change how the player inhabits the role, that obstacle may be inconvenience rather than meaningful resistance.
Destructive Resistance Breaks The Fantasy
Destructive resistance creates difficulty that doesn’t belong to the experience. Confusing controls, unclear feedback, inconsistent rules, arbitrary failure, and unnecessary repetition can all resist the player, but they don’t encourage meaningful behaviour. A detective shouldn’t miss essential evidence because an interaction prompt appears only when standing at a strangely specific angle. A stealth player shouldn’t be detected through a solid wall because a guard briefly developed supernatural vision. A platforming player shouldn’t miss a jump because the animation, collision, and camera disagree about where the character’s feet are.
These problems don’t make the player feel like a detective, infiltrator, or acrobat. They make the player feel like unpaid quality assurance. Destructive resistance often disguises itself as challenge. The game demands more effort, so the experience appears deeper. However, effort only creates depth when players can connect the outcome to their decisions. If they can’t explain what happened, they can’t meaningfully change what they do next.
Insider Tip: Frustration becomes useful only when the player can identify its cause and form a better plan.
Friction Needs To Be Readable
Productive resistance depends on communication. Players need to recognise the obstacle, understand the relevant rules, and receive enough feedback to interpret the result. A guard turning their head communicates a change in visibility. A weapon animation communicates commitment. A damaged shelter communicates vulnerability. A suspicious response communicates social risk. These signals allow players to build a mental model before making their next decision.
The game doesn’t need to explain every relationship through a tutorial window. In many cases, it’s stronger when the world communicates through behaviour. The player tries something, observes the reaction, and updates their understanding.
That process creates discovery. The player feels like they’re learning the world rather than waiting for the designer to explain it. The signals must remain reliable. If an object looks interactive but never responds, players learn to ignore similar objects. If a rule works during one encounter but is quietly disabled during another, players stop generalising. When feedback becomes unclear, experimentation starts feeling like gambling.
Insider Tip: A system can be difficult without being confusing. Hide the solution if necessary, but don’t hide the rules needed to discover it.
Failure Should Produce Information
Failure is one of the clearest tests of whether friction is productive. When players fail, the result should tell them something about the system. A failed stealth attempt can reveal how sound travels. A missed attack can reveal the cost of poor positioning. A failed traversal attempt can reveal momentum, reach, or timing. A lost survival encounter can reveal that the player prepared for the wrong pressure.
The failure still hurts, but it gives the player something useful to carry forward. Their next attempt changes because their understanding has changed. Destructive failure creates no meaningful information. The player dies to an attack they couldn’t see, misses a requirement the game never communicated, or repeats a long section before reaching the part they’re actually trying to learn. Eventually, they may succeed through memorisation, luck, or exhaustion, but the game hasn’t created mastery.
| Failure Result | What The Player Learns | Design Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Clear cause and effect | Why the strategy failed | Encourages adaptation |
| Readable enemy response | How the system evaluates behaviour | Builds understanding |
| Consistent mechanical limit | What the player must prepare for | Creates mastery |
| Unclear or delayed feedback | Nothing reliable | Encourages guessing |
| Rule changes without warning | Previous knowledge can’t be trusted | Stops experimentation |
| Excessive repetition | Failure costs time rather than thought | Creates fatigue |
Good failure redirects behaviour. Bad failure merely sends the player backwards.
Insider Tip: After a failed attempt, ask whether the player knows what they’ll do differently. If the answer is no, the resistance probably isn’t teaching them anything.
Removing Friction Can Remove Responsibility
Modern design often treats smoothness as an unquestioned goal. Traversal is automated, navigation is highlighted, health returns automatically, conversations label their outcomes, and objectives remain permanently attached to the screen. Each decision may solve a real usability problem. Collectively, however, they can shift responsibility away from the player and into the system. The game begins interpreting, preparing, navigating, and recovering on the player’s behalf. This creates a smoother experience, but smoothness isn’t the same as immersion. Immersion requires the player to participate behaviourally. They need to observe, decide, commit, and deal with the result.
The answer isn’t to make every game exhausting. Nobody needs a seventeen-step shoe-tying mechanic before leaving the tutorial bedroom. The goal is to protect the forms of resistance that make the central fantasy playable. If preparation defines the role, don’t automate all preparation. If spatial awareness defines the challenge, don’t solve navigation completely. If judgement defines the fantasy, don’t label every choice with its future outcome.
Insider Tip: Accessibility should remove barriers that prevent players from engaging with the intended experience. It shouldn’t automatically remove the intended experience itself.
Design Friction Around Behaviour
A useful friction audit begins with the fantasy rather than the difficulty setting. Identify the behaviour the player should repeatedly perform, then determine what resistance makes that behaviour necessary. If the player should feel resourceful, the game needs limitations that reward creative reuse. If the player should feel vulnerable, danger needs consequences. If the player should feel clever, the game needs information that can be interpreted rather than answers that can be collected.
Then examine how clearly the resistance is communicated. Players need enough information to make a decision, but they don’t need certainty. Uncertainty can create productive tension when the rules remain understandable. Finally, inspect what happens after failure. The response should preserve the player’s ability to learn, recover, and attempt a better strategy. The penalty can be meaningful without erasing the information the player gained.
| Audit Question | Productive Answer | Warning Sign |
|---|---|---|
| What behaviour does this friction create? | Behaviour that reinforces the fantasy | Behaviour unrelated to the fantasy |
| Can players understand the relevant rule? | The world provides readable evidence | The rule remains hidden or inconsistent |
| Does failure produce information? | Players can form a better plan | Players can only repeat the attempt |
| Is the cost appropriate? | Consequence creates commitment | Consequence creates excessive repetition |
| Does the resistance create decisions? | Players compare risks and approaches | Players follow one mandatory solution |
| Does it remain consistent? | Knowledge transfers to new situations | Exceptions invalidate prior learning |
Friction should redirect the player into more meaningful behaviour. It shouldn’t exist simply because difficulty makes a feature appear substantial.
Insider Tip: A game with no resistance gives the player very little reason to think. A game filled with the wrong resistance gives the player very little reason to care.
Final Thoughts
Productive resistance asks the player to think, adapt, practise, interpret, or commit. It creates meaningful pressure while preserving a clear relationship between action and reaction. Even when the player fails, they learn something that helps them understand the world.
Destructive resistance interrupts that relationship. It introduces confusion, inconsistency, repetition, or arbitrary failure that pulls the player away from the fantasy. The important question isn’t whether your game is difficult. It’s whether the difficulty makes players behave in ways that support the experience you promised them.
That’s it for this one! Subscribe to The Design Lab for more breakdowns and analysis. Please like, share, and comment if you found this article useful AND…
Need help applying these concepts to your game? Most games don’t fail because of bad ideas. They fail because the systems don’t work together to evoke immersion.
> Work with me:
https://thedesignlab.blog/services/
> Or go deeper into this framework:
Register for my upcoming book – Immersive Design Framework – below and get a second book, now, free!
Grab Myles’ FREE ebook now and find 15 indispensable design patterns that will equip you to craft exceptional Web3 gaming experiences. We’ll also notify you when his new book on immersive design is out!